Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 19 Jun 2002

Vol. 553 No. 3

Criminal Justice (Public Order) Bill, 2002: Second Stage.

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Mr. McDowell)

I move "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

A Leas-Cheann Comhairle, I wish to begin by congratulating you on your election to this House. I pay tribute to your term as Ceann Comhairle during a period when I was not a Member of this House. However, I did have the privilege of seeing how well you discharged your functions, as I watched you on the television in the offices of the Attorney General. I also wish to congratulate Deputy Deasy on his election to the Dáil, and on his nomination as party spokesman for Justice, Equality and Law Reform.

This Bill was presented to the previous Dáil on 3 April 2002 by my predecessor in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy John O'Donoghue. The Bill is relatively short but it is, nevertheless, most important. It deals with an area of great public concern to ordinary law-abiding people, namely those who may wish to socialise in the evening and late at night and those who wish to relax in the quiet enjoyment of their property, although obviously these two categories are not mutually exclusive. I could go further.

In introducing this measure, I wish to echo the sentiments expressed recently by the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Micheál Martin, about the serious social and health consequences of a youth culture in which alcohol consumption plays a major role. A generation ago, younger people had far less money to spend on alcohol. Nowadays, cost does not seem to be a serious constraint on consumption. Significantly, the consumption of spirits in Ireland has grown by 50% in the past five years. The Minister for Health and Children is properly concerned with the health implications of a drink culture. As Minister with responsibility for criminal and licensing law, I have major concerns about the implications of the drink culture for public order and civil society. Wanton violence, thuggery and destructiveness are increasingly obvious symptoms of a decline in public order. These further affect victims and potential victims, they undermine our collective sense of security, decrease our sense of freedom from fear and degrade our amenity of life, particularly in urban areas. One of the most disturbing developments in recent years has been the mindless but vicious behaviour of young men who carry out random "run-by" assaults, consisting of a blow to the face of completely innocent and inoffensive strangers. Such offences are difficult to prosecute but I hope that any proven case will be regarded by all concerned with appropriate gravity. I am no latter day puritan or killjoy, either in outlook or in habit, but I am clear about the need for responsibility in this matter. Purveyors and consumers of alcohol are equally responsible under the law for the consequences of excessive consumption.

In this context, I acknowledge that punishment and sentencing are the functions of the judicial arm of the State. While we would not expect the Judiciary to regard imprisonment as a first resort for offenders who cause disorder while drunk, it may be that a judicious combination of immediate substantial fines, coupled with a deferment of the issue of custodial sentences could be part of an effective strategy to curb public order offences, especially in the case of first offenders. There is no greater incentive towards good behaviour than having the issue of a possible custodial sentence deferred in order to assess the capacity of a convicted public order offender to adjust his or her social behaviour to comply with decent norms.

In the context of the commitment in An Agreed Programme for Government to achieve more uniformity in sentencing, I will be considering the possibility of providing a statutory basis for sentencing principles and guidelines. This Bill is designed to afford a greater degree of safety and protection to persons who may be out and about, most probably at night, for whatever reason, so that they will not be accosted by drunken or disorderly delinquents intent on creating trouble. We have seen how these drunken episodes can escalate into serious public order disturbances and late night street violence which can result in serious injury or death. Very simply put, the purpose of this Bill is to augment the law so as to tackle the problem of drink-related late night disturbances and the growing problem of late night street violence which has its origins in or around licensed premises and fast food outlets in urban areas. The Bill applies to pubs, off-licences, discos, night clubs, dance venues of all types, amusement arcades, chip shops, take-aways and mobile food vehicles. The Bill, we hope, will strengthen existing Garda powers in this area and will extend, in one important respect, the sanctions which may be imposed on offenders under the Public Order Act, 1994. I will return to that aspect of the matter shortly.

The first of the two main provisions in the Bill takes as its starting point the fact that owners of premises which are licensed to dispense intoxicating liquor on its own or in conjunction with other entertainment or leisure activities are in an economically privileged position. That position is balanced with a duty to behave responsibly with respect to the supply of alcohol to their customers. In making those remarks, I would say the majority of licensees are responsible in the manner in which they carry out their legal and social duties. It goes without saying that they are already under an obligation under civil law to ensure that those customers are not harmed in any way under the general neighbour principle which applies in our law of torts. This Bill directly underscores the fact that they are also under a duty to ensure that their sale and supply of drink does not interfere with the rights of others and is not injurious to the common good.

The owners of food premises of the type covered by the Bill are not, for the most part, directly involved in the sale of alcohol but, as most of us know, their premises can, unfortunately, act, from time to time, as a magnet or focal point for intoxicated or belligerent elements looking for trouble at the slightest provocation and sometimes even without such provocation. Unfortunately for the victims and other persons affected by the noise, nuisance or disorder, the end result is the same – a sense of mayhem on our streets. Proprietors of these establishments will now have to take a close look at the management and conduct of their premises and introduce whatever management policy changes are necessary in conjunction with the assistance of the local gardaí, if necessary, to ensure that unruly elements do not frequent or congregate in the vicinity of their premises.

This will be accomplished by providing gardaí with new powers so that they can apply in particular circumstances to the District Court for a closure order which will have the effect of limiting hours of opening of a premises which is the principal focus of or associated with serious trouble or disorder and involving persons who have been present on their premises. I stress at this point that this power only arises where the owner of the premises has failed to act on foot of prior warnings by the Garda Síochána about the problem and has ignored its advice to take whatever steps may be necessary to eliminate it. Under the order the premises may be restricted from opening for certain periods or it may be closed down altogether. There are already precedents in recent legislation for such action in relation to offences connected with the sale of drugs or the supply of drink to under age persons on premises licensed for the sale of drink. As I already said, the type of premises covered by this Bill is wider.

The second key provision in this Bill applies to persons who may be charged with a public order related street offence under the Public Order Act, 1994. It means that a person who is facing conviction for such an offence may also suffer the additional penalty of an exclusion order prohibiting him or her from entering or being in the vicinity of specified premises outside which the incident giving rise to the original incident occurred for up to a period of 12 months. A breach of this order will itself be a serious offence punishable by a substantial fine or a term of imprisonment. If a person has to serve a term of imprisonment for the particular offence under the Public Order Act, 1994, the term of the exclusion order will apply immediately from the date of release.

In essence, therefore, the Criminal Justice (Public Order) Bill will ensure that our law is more responsive to the needs of society in fighting serious, threatening and disruptive anti-social behaviour and will reinforce the message that those who engage in such behaviour will be dealt with quickly and effectively through the criminal justice system. We owe it to the people we serve, as legislators, to take the steps we see necessary to ensure that they can walk the streets late at night and rest peacefully in their homes. The proposed measures, I hope, will result in significant reductions in crime, public disorder for local residents and the serious nuisance associated with late night disturbances. They will also provide improved protection, reassurance and safety for the majority of law abiding members of the public who fear that they may be caught up in the development of trouble making and general delinquency.

As regards individuals who persist in getting drunk and involved in loutish behaviour, this is a matter for which they must take personal responsibility. We will ensure that the streets are policed and that this Bill will give the Garda Síochána effective additional powers to deal with the perpetrators. We will see to it that the message goes out that this type of behaviour is not acceptable. For their part, the purveyors of alcohol, whether it is associated with other forms of entertainment through clubs, concerts or whatever, will now have to take their responsibilities to their customers and the wider population much more seriously than heretofore or else suffer the consequences. The owners of food premises particularly those labelled as fast food outlets, although that term covers a range of suppliers from the cheap and cheerful to the more respectable family run and franchised premises, have, in general, nothing to fear from this Bill but they will have to take adequate measures – I understand that this, in many cases, is already occurring – to ensure that their premises do not become the focal point of public disorder and abusive or dangerous behaviour.

I turn now to the operational response of the Garda Síochána to the problem the Bill addresses. The latest initiative, Operation Encounter, was developed out of the success of the previous Operation Oíche which had provided the gardaí with considerable logistical information on the times and locations of serious incidents of drunken public disorder. The gardaí are now in a position to target this problem at source. Certain venues such as night clubs, licensed premises and fast food outlets which have been associated with rowdyism and more serious manifestations of loutish thuggery now receive special attention at times which public order problems are likely to be prevalent. Particular attention is also being paid to ensuring that owners and managers of such premises are fully aware of their responsibilities and of the duty of care which they owe to their patrons and other members of the public in relation to these matters. The changes in the law which this Bill proposes will give the gardaí significant additional leverage in this whole matter and should assist them greatly in restoring peace and order to areas which have been plagued by the problem of drunken hooliganism.

I will deal now in some detail with the sections of the Bill. Section 1 is a standard provision which sets out the Short Title and provides for the collective citations of the Bill and other Acts whose provisions are affected by it. The Bill will come into operation one month after the day of its passing. Section 2, the interpretation section, contains standard provisions for the necessary interpretation and defines certain terms used in the Bill. The provisions of the Bill apply to what are termed "catering premises" which are defined as any premises licensed under the Licensing Acts, 1883 to 2000, the Registration of Clubs Acts, 1908 to 2000, the Public Dance Halls Act, 1935, the Gaming and Lotteries Acts, 1956 to 1986, and to any food outlet used for the sale of food, including take-aways, whether fixed or mobile. Thus the Bill will apply to pubs, off-licences, dance venues of all types, amusement arcades, chip shops, take-aways and mobile food vans. The term "licensed premises" and "licensee" have particular meanings for the purposes of the Bill and they are somewhat wider in scope than those terms are generally understood to mean in the context of the liquor licensing code.

Section 3 deals with exclusion orders. It enables the District Court to make an exclusion order as an additional penalty where a person is convicted of certain public order offences under the Criminal Justice (Public Order ) Act, 1994. These relevant offences are intoxication in a public place – section 4; disorderly conduct in a public place – section 5; threatening, abusive or insulting behaviour – section 6; distribution or display of offensive material – section 7; failure to comply with a garda – section 8; and wilful obstruction – section 9.

An exclusion order prohibits a person from entering or being in the vicinity of a specified premises for a period of up to 12 months. If a term of imprisonment has been imposed for the offence for which he or she is convicted, the exclusion order will take effect immediately after the person is released from prison. The governor or person in charge of a place of detention will be obliged to notify the Garda Commissioner when such a person is to be released so that the exclusion order can be applied from that date.

A breach of an exclusion order will be an offence. An exclusion order may only be imposed for offences which are committed after the commencement of the Act. The new sanction cannot be imposed retrospectively.

Section 4 deals with applications for closure orders. Under this section a member of the Garda Síochána not below the rank of inspector may apply to the District Court for a closure order to restrict the opening hours of a premises covered by the Bill. Before an application for a closure order can be made, there must either have been disorder on the premises or excessive noise emanating from the premises or its vicinity and such disorder or noise must be likely to recur.

The disorder or noise must involve persons who were on the premises. The noise criterion has been drafted to ensure that it exceeds what would normally be regarded as acceptable or reasonable in the circumstances. The term "in the vicinity" is defined as not exceeding a distance of 100 metres from the premises involved. In addition, before making an application for a closure order, the Garda Síochána must have notified the licensee of the premises that disorder or excessive noise has occurred and requested that he or she take such action within his or her control to prevent a recurrence. A maximum of seven days is allowed for the licensee to rectify the problem. The owner or the operator of the premises shall be given notice of the intention to apply for a closure order.

Section 5 deals with closure orders and sets out the grounds on which such orders can be made, their application and related provisions. The court must be satisfied that disorder or noise has occurred and that the making of the closure order is necessary to prevent a recurrence. A closure order could require a premises to close earlier than would otherwise be permitted on a particular day or days, or for a certain period, or else require the premises to be closed completely for a period not exceeding seven days. In the case of a subsequent order having to be made, the premises could be closed for a period not exceeding 30 days.

When making the order, the court may specify that prior to the annual renewal of the licence or registration applicable to the particular premises, certain requirements would have to be fulfilled, for example, the installation of a CCTV system, restrictions on the type of substances to be sold or limits to be placed on the number of persons who may be admitted.

In considering whether to make a closure order, the court can take into account the conduct of the licensee, manager or employees in relation to the operation of the premises. A closure order may apply to the whole or part of the premises and shall specify the ground or grounds upon which it was made. It will come into effect when written notice of it has been served on the licensee or manager of the premises.

A notice specifying the closure times and the grounds for the closure must be affixed to the premises in a prominent position. It shall be an offence not to display such a notice, with a fine for a first offence of €300 and up to €600 for a second or subsequent offence. Employees of premises which are closed will not be disadvantaged in their employment during the period of closure.

Section 6 deals with appeals and provides that the right of appeal lies to the Circuit Court against the making of a closure order. To ensure the overall effectiveness of a closure order, the lodgement of an appeal will not of itself affect the coming into operation of the order unless the Circuit Court decides accordingly within seven days after the date the closure order was made. This will then suspend the order pending the hearing of the appeal.

Section 7 deals with the extension of closure orders and permits the court to extend the order with such variation as it sees fit. Section 8 deals with the breach of closure orders and provides that a person who permits his or her premises to be open in breach of a closure order will incur a fine of €3,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or both. It shall be an offence for a person to be found on a catering premises in breach of a closure order unless he or she can show that the requisite notice was not affixed to the exterior of the premises. It will also be an offence to fail to leave a catering premises when requested to do so by a member of the Garda Síochána.

Section 9 deals with liability for offences by bodies corporate and unincorporated and is a standard technical provision. Section 10 deals with jurisdiction and provides for the jurisdiction of the District Court and the Circuit Court in relation to the Bill.

I look forward with interest to the contributions by Deputies from all sides of the House on the provisions in the Bill. Many will have their own views and will doubtless be in a position to make a valuable input to the debate. Given that this is a new measure and that it can have serious effects, both for those affected by it and for proprietors of premises, I look forward to Committee Stage and will deal positively with suggestions to improve the effectiveness of the legislation.

Mr. Deasy

I congratulate you, Sir, on your new position as Leas-Cheann Comhairle. I also congratulate the Minister on his appointment and the new Minister of State, Deputy O'Dea.

My initial reaction to the Bill was to ask where was the substance. The Minister cannot be serious in suggesting that it will solve the problem of street violence. Under Fianna Fáil and the Progressive Democrats in government, we have become a nation of crime victims. People are afraid to walk the streets at night and the situation is deteriorating.

The former Minister, Deputy O'Donoghue, likes to claim that in the Government's last term of office, he introduced more Bills in this area than anyone else. However, it did not achieve anything. What is required is more rigorous enforcement of the existing laws. Two years ago the then Minister said there was no appreciable increase in public order offences and street violence. We now know the nonsense of that.

The Bill ignores the root cause of public disorder, which is alcohol abuse. It is mentioned in the front page of the explanatory memorandum but it is not addressed thereafter. The Bill is out of touch with the needs of the country. Given what is happening, it almost amounts to Mickey Mouse legislation. All the solicitors I have spoken to have said it is almost worthless. The Department should start to talk and listen to the solicitors and gardaí who are dealing with this problem on the streets because the provisions of the legislation are not relevant to their concerns.

The Minister inherited this legislation. Had he been in office at the time I am sure he would not have sanctioned it. I therefore look forward to having the Bill amended on Committee Stage.

The Bill provides that a District Court may place an exclusion order on an individual who commits an offence in or near a premises. This almost amounts to an admission that the criminal justice system is ineffectual in reforming those who are convicted of crimes. It is almost as if they are expected to commit the same crimes upon release from prison. There is no talk of reforming them, but we would save ourselves a lot of time and grief if we tried to reform them while they are incarcerated rather than expecting them to continually repeat the same crimes. We are assuming that this cycle of violence will go on and on. This part of the Bill will have very little effect on street violence and frankly it is a waste of police time.

The second part, which provides that the Garda can apply to the District Court to shut down an offending premises, is fine but one wonders if this will be implemented and enforced like many pieces of legislation which were enacted by the previous Government. It also involves more paperwork for gardaí. Introducing legislation is laudable, but the Minister need only take a look at what happened regarding the underage drinking legislation which was introduced by the previous Government about two years ago. Up until recently, I do not think there has been one pub shut down in Dublin or Cork city because of that legislation. Less than half of the 184 prosecutions have gone through successfully. County Mayo, with 23, tops the list for successful prosecutions. One wonders why that is so. The reason is fairly simple, that the chief superintendents there are enforcing the law. Many superintendents and chief superintendents around the country are simply not doing so and are not getting any direction or leadership from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform to do exactly that.

When the former Minister, Deputy O'Donoghue, was introducing this Bill he said that these measures would be tough and added that some people might find them unpalatable. I find them downright weak and, to a certain extent, inane. If this is the answer to street violence, then this nation is in a great deal of trouble.

Many members of the public feel that this Chamber is completely irrelevant to their lives and that politicians do not have a clue. When you look at this, you really must agree with them. One person made a good comment. He summed it up by saying that what we are dealing with here is an epidemic of thuggery. There are more drunks on the streets and as a result there is considerably more violence. It is as simple as that.

The first page of the explanatory memorandum states that the Bill's purpose is "to strengthen the law in order to deal more effectively with late night public disorder and disturbance which mainly has its origins in alcohol abuse", and then proceeds to completely ignore alcohol abuse. It does not suggest how the Minister would reform that situation. It does not deal with it. The whole premise of the Bill seems to be a total avoidance of alcohol-related disturbances. The Minister should go and ask the general practitioners, those guys who stay up until 7 o'clock or 8 o'clock in the morning dressing wounds on weekends. He should ask them what is the cause of street violence. To a person, they will tell him that it is due to the abuse of alcohol.

Much of what has happened in the past couple of years can be put down to the liberalisation of our drinking laws, for which the former Minister, Deputy O'Donoghue, was responsible. Two years later many people are dead and others are on life support machines, and this is what the Govern ment comes up with. We need to get real and people in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform need to start visiting the real Ireland. They need to start talking to the gardaí on the beat, they need to start talking to the night-club owners and they need to start talking to the teenagers who are binge-drinking.

The reality is that young fellows will go out and have four or five pints and they will get a bit bloated. Therefore they will go for the re-energisers, the likes of Goldschlager or Jaegermister, After Shock or Sidekicks, and they will knock back about five or six of them. Then they will go into a disco or a night-club and pop an "E", and that will keep them going for about four or five hours. That is when little Johnny, in whose mouth butter would not usually melt, becomes a monster and that is when he becomes violent. It is happening to thousands of young men around the country. That is the culture that has arisen because of the liberalisation of the licensing laws. The Minister must stem the availability of alcohol to minors and the type of drinks that are available to them.

In flesh and blood terms, there are about 30 victims of street violence every day. Irish teenagers top the European league for binge-drinking. Some 50% of A&E admissions are alcohol-related. There has been a 50% increase in alcohol addiction among those under the age of 25 in the past ten years. That contains a fairly simple message; it is not rocket science. There is a direct correlation. Many of these people drink alcohol as well as taking ecstasy and cocaine. They mix both and what happens is one gets a young man whose heart pumps at ten times its normal rate. It takes about four or five gardaí to bring that person under control in many cases. As a result, one ends up with injured gardaí as well as injured young people. A special Garda committee has been set up to look at the possibility of giving the gardaí non-lethal weapons like stun guns. We must support the gardaí and we must look seriously at giving them the tools to address these problems.

What else should the Minister do? He should allow gardaí to detain people overnight. That would provide a sharp lesson for some people. There has been an increase in street violence since the traditional method of holding people in cells overnight before bringing them into court was dispensed with.

It is also useless making an affluent middle-class person put money into a poor box. This has no deterrent effect. It would be more effective if the Minister published the person's name in the newspaper. He should publish an official list of offences and put it in the local newspaper. If he must, the Minister should shame the offender. Perhaps we should start thinking about making the parents of juveniles responsible for damage caused and allow people to sue the parents of little Johnny who causes the damage – that will make him think. The Minister spoke of personal responsibility and that is what it is all about. There is no sense of personal responsibility when it comes to this matter.

Where is the provision of CCTV? I attended a meeting of Dungarvan Urban District Council last Monday night. I have been begging people, including the county manager, and business people for money so we can provide CCTV. The prospectus was presented to us on Monday night. Unfortunately, we were told that we cannot apply because no application forms are available. This must be sorted out. People around the country are looking for the provision of CCTV and there does not seem to be any willingness in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform to speed up this process.

Will the Minister increase the number of undercover officers in night-clubs and pubs? Will he properly enforce the statutory closure times for pubs? Closing time in this country is almost a matter of opinion. One can give leeway of five or ten minutes, but some people are flouting the law and are getting away with it in certain areas.

Will the Minister introduce a proper national ID card system? This is favoured by senior gardaí and they have gone on record about that. Will he regulate the bouncers who, in my opinion, cause many of the problems inside and outside the night-clubs and pubs?

Are we going to see a hands-on Minister? Perhaps that is the most important question. Are we going to see another Minister who just throws legislation at a problem? What we need is someone who deals with this issue head-on. We have had Operation Oíche and Operation Encounter. In the first 22 days of Operation Encounter, 5,300 offences were committed. Other similarly disastrous operations come to mind like Operation Barbarossa and Operation Market Garden. The operations concerned were totally ineffective.

The Government has been in denial about this issue for a long time. The Bill will not deal with street violence as we know it. The primary response should be one of providing preventative policing. By that I mean putting more gardaí on the beat and providing increased support for them. At best, the Bill is a continuation of a PR exercise designed by a Government before a general election. Things were becoming quite bad on the crime front so this legislation was introduced. At worst, the Bill is misguided because it misses the point entirely with regard to alcohol abuse. On too many occasions legislation has been thrown at the problem of crime. This Bill is another example of that and it will not solve anything. What we need is implementation and enforcement and the resolve and leadership necessary to ensure the former come to pass.

What we seem to have here is a complete absence of a reflective policy on policing. We need to review the kind of policing we operate and not just throw Bills of this nature at it. The Minister must do better than this. The country does not need more legal smart talk, it needs a Minister who walks the walk. It is my opinion that, as a Minister, Deputy McDowell will be judged to a large extent on whether the situation on the streets improves, on whether morale among gardaí improves and on whether organisation within the Garda Síochána as a whole improves.

I look forward to working with him in Committee on the Bill, which is worthless. I reiterate that I know the Minister inherited the Bill, which should be amended because it is loosely written and will prove, more than anything else, to be a drain on Garda resources. I hope he will take the points I have made on board.

Ms O'Sullivan

I congratulate the Minister on his appointment to the Justice, Equality and Law Reform portfolio. I also congratulate Deputy Deasy on a spirited and inspiring maiden speech which contained a number of refreshing comments. I feel like a veteran at this stage, despite the fact that I was one of the newest Members of the House during the lifetime of the previous Dáil. I also wish to congratulate the Leas-Cheann Comhairle on his appointment.

I concur with many of the comments Deputy Deasy made about the legislation. The Bill contains nothing the Labour Party would wish to oppose, but it also contains very little. Deputy Deasy described it as a "Mickey Mouse" Bill, but I would describe it as a Fianna Fáil focus group fig leaf. I am not sure about the Minister's party, but the Fianna Fáil party began to panic in the lead-up to the election when focus groups began to report that crime was a major issue. This was despite the fact that Mr. Zero Tolerance had occupied the position the Minister now holds for the past five years and had made his reputation on the fact that he was going to sweep into the Department and initiate change. When in Opposition, the former Minister attacked everything his predecessor did or did not do. He then entered office, stated that he was going to clean everything up and then failed miserably to do so. That information was fed back to the Government by the focus groups in recent months and a sudden urgency was given to addressing the fact that there is a serious public order problem in this country. As a result, this legislation was drawn up and many public statements were made. However, nothing has been done to address this most serious problem.

With regard to the job done by Deputy O'Donoghue and the two parties in Government during the past five years, it must be stated that things are worse now than they were in 1997. If the Minister asks anyone outside the House whether things have improved during the intervening period, they will answer in the negative and state that they live in greater fear. People are afraid to walk the streets or to allow their children to go out, they are afraid of being at home alone in case they are attacked or their houses broken into, they fear walking through certain parts of their own neighbourhoods in case they are attacked, they fear being knocked down by stolen cars and they are afraid of being intimidated if they report crime to the Garda and, as a result, a great deal of crime goes unreported. While the Minister's predecessor was able to inform the House that the incidence of certain forms of crime was in decline, his comments were simply not true because such incidents were not being reported.

The situation is out of control. As the parent of a young man – I accept that there are many Members who are younger than me and who have probably experienced this for themselves – I am aware that there is a real fear with regard to allowing young people to go out at night in our cities. That is the problem we face. In many instances, communities are turning to the local heavies rather than the Garda and getting them to deal with the perpetrators of violence in certain situations. That is a matter of great concern and it must be addressed.

I accept that this legislation does not address the entire area of public order and is specific to disorder occurring outside certain premises. If the Minister is intent on doing a good job, he will be obliged to address this matter in a much broader and more holistic way than that pursued in the Bill. This legislation merely scratches at the surface of the issue and I agree with Deputy Deasy that it will not make any difference.

Sections 13 and 14 of the Intoxicating Liquor Act, 2000, contain provisions relating to underage persons. These sections provide for temporary closure orders and they remove the reasonable grounds defence with regard to the serving of people who are underage. However, everyone knows that people under 18 are still being served in pubs and off licences and nobody seems to be doing anything about it. A consideration of the way that legislation was implemented would surely lead us to have doubts about the implementation of the legislation before us.

The Bill is, in many ways, an attempt to close the stable door after the horse has bolted. In other words, it tries to deal with the consumption of too much alcohol rather than trying to prevent such consumption. The latter is the real problem. Figures released recently show an alarming increase in the rate of drinking among young people. That is another issue which must be addressed in a far more serious way than simply dealing with what they do when they end up on the streets having indulged in the various forms of alcoholic drinks, etc., to which Deputy Deasy referred.

There is clearly an obligation, under the intoxicating liquor legislation, on licensees to refuse to serve drink to people who have had enough. I would have preferred to see the Minister introduce legislation that contained tough provisions in that regard. It is clear that publicans are serving people who are in no fit state to drink any more alcohol. Placing the onus on licence holders would have been a more effective way of dealing with this issue and of obliging them to refuse to serve people who are under 18.

The Bill is a desperate attempt to deal with the symptoms of a social problem rather than dealing with that problem itself. We must address the fact that young people are growing up in a culture where there is little else for them to do except go to places where drink is served. They do not have places in which they can gather where alcohol is not available. I met four teenage girls three days ago when I was visiting a particular part of my constituency and they informed me that they literally have nowhere to go and nothing to do because they are now on their school holidays. They said that they are hanging around on street corners and being told that they are causing trouble. The Government would do well to address that issue. Perhaps before we ensure that we have wonderful national facilities for sport, etc., we could ensure that we have wonderful local community facilities for sport and other activities for young people in particular.

Structural reform of the Garda and the strengthening of Garda numbers must be part of the answer. I recently received a letter from a group of business people in my city. The letter, which was also sent to the former Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and to Ministers of State in my constituency, claimed that Garda numbers in Limerick are more than 50 below Government policy. I am sure there is a similar shortfall in other urban areas. There is a gross shortage of gardaí on the streets protecting the peace, in keeping with the title of the force, Garda Síochána. This shortage must be addressed. There is a perception in many communities that there is not a Garda presence when it is needed most, especially at night time. Vulnerable elderly people and young mothers living alone feel particularly bereft.

My party has made proposals for the structural reform of the Garda. These include a proposal to establish a police authority similar to the one in Northern Ireland as recommended in the Patten report, the appointment of a Garda ombudsman and the setting up of local Garda liaison committees. These committees would provide for interaction between local community leaders and the Garda authorities to identify the specific needs of local areas. We must address the problem of Garda numbers and give gardaí the capacity to do their job. How can the Garda implement this and other legislation with the numbers they have been allowed? CCTV is awaited in many places, including my city, but it has not been installed. I would not support Deputy Deasy's proposals regarding stun guns but I agree with him that we must give the gardaí the back-up they need.

The term "zero tolerance" has been bandied about but it has not been implemented nor has it been understood. A section of the National Crime Forum report of 1998 is devoted to zero tolerance. The report lists the essential features of this paradigm of crime control. It states:

The connection between disorder, fear and serious crime must be noted and addressed. The seriousness of crime is to be defined by the context, neighbourhood priorities and the extent to which problems destabilise neighbourhoods and communities. The priorities in crime control should be to prevent and control crime, to restore and maintain order and reduce citizen fear and not merely to apprehend and process offenders.

The report later states:

A wider view of law enforcement is taken where emphasis is placed on defining and solving the larger problems within which individual cases occur in contrast to an approach which tends to be less preventive and which responds only when crime occurs. This means a reactive approach to individual cases.

This report is worth reading. We must tackle the causes of crime. We must address the prevention of crime rather than merely responding when crimes have been committed. This Bill is concerned only with responding to crimes when they have been committed. Zero tolerance needs to be rehabilitated by the current Administration. I hope the Minister will look at this issue. We must address the problem of crime in a holistic way rather than introducing legislation which we do not have the manpower to enforce and which merely scratches the surface of the problems.

One of the major problems facing our society is out-of-control binge drinking which results in random acts of violence, thuggery, street disorder and the imposition of fear on innocent citizens. The Bill is concerned solely with disorder which occurs within 100 metres of certain types of premises. People who drink to excess often commit crimes far from the premises where they may have been drinking. I would like to see the terms of the legislation extended to deal with this situation. The Bill does not deal with disorder in places other than outside pubs or fast-food outlets. Much of this type of disorder takes place on green areas in housing estates, on street corners or down alley-ways. The problem affects a broader range of areas than is dealt with in the Bill.

I support the attempt to control the behaviour of bouncers. In a recent case CCTV evidence made it clear that the position of bouncers is sometimes abused. The regulation of bouncers was promised by the previous Government but it has not been done yet.

We must ensure that innocent young people are not charged with public order offences. Some young people cause trouble at the end of a night's drinking but others do not. We should not assume that young people who are in the company of trouble makers are trouble makers themselves. In the frenzy of a disorderly situation those who are not responsible for violence can be dragged into it. We must ensure that innocent young people are protected. Young people who do not drink might easily find themselves in the company of others who cause disturbance. Young people have a great sense of justice and we must ensure that those who have not caused trouble do not suffer under this legislation.

I do not object to this Bill and I hope it can be strengthened on Committee Stage. However, the huge problem of violence on our streets and the explosion of excessive drinking in recent years must be tackled in a number of ways. We must consider prevention, provide alternative places for young people to go and ensure that owners of licensed premises fulfil their obligation not to serve alcohol to people who have already had enough to drink.

The Minister is an energetic person. He has strong views and I am sure I will disagree with him on many issues. However, I hope he will consider the points made by the Opposition and endeavour to address this issue in a broader way. The two Government parties ran a very successful election campaign but that will not be enough to deal with this issue. People want to see real results and to get rid of the fear they have suffered for the past five years. They want effective action from the new Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform.

Mr. O'Connor

I preface my remarks by congratulating you, a Cheann Comhairle, on your election. We have known each other for a long time. When you were Minister for Health, you were kind enough to appoint me to the Tallaght Hospital board, which started me on the road to where I now find myself. Many people ask me if I am sorry not to have been here 20 years ago. I am not sorry about that but I am very happy to have been elected on this occasion and I look forward to my time here. I warmly congratulate you and thank you for the welcome you have given me and other new Members.

I also congratulate the new Minister and wish him well in his duties. I believe he will be a fine Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and I look forward to working with him. He knows I will be wearing a path to his door on behalf of the people of Dublin South-West from areas such as Firhouse, Templeogue, Greenhills and Tallaght. I also convey my good wishes to the new Minister of State, Deputy O'Dea. There is a certain irony in the fact that I am speaking after my good friend, Deputy O'Sullivan, because people often make the comparison between Tallaght and Limerick, sometimes in unfortunate ways. However, we should be positive about our towns and cities. For a long time, we said that Tallaght had the population of a city but the status of a village, but thank God that has changed. Tallaght is a great place and I am delighted to represent the good people of my constituency here today.

I am pleased to take the opportunity to speak on this Bill, which is important for my constituency. Standing here, I am conscious I am following in the steps of Sean Walsh and Chris Flood, who was a well-respected Deputy since 1987. If Chris Flood had not taken the decision to stand down, I would still be toiling away for him and other candidates, including Deputy Conor Lenihan, in my constituency.

Every week at my seven local advice clinics, I listen to the stressed parents and on occasion grandparents of young men who, while socialising over a weekend, have been the victims of unprovoked attacks. The shock and stress this causes within their families and their parents' feelings of helplessness often results in blame being directed towards us as politicians and the Garda for not doing enough.

The Criminal Justice (Public Order) Bill, 2002, starts the process of delivering on the Government's commitments, as outlined in An Agreed Programme for Government, published by the Progressive Democrats and Fianna Fáil, to tackle the issues around public order and street crime, particularly in the level of damage being done in the hours immediately after the pubs and clubs close and young people are on their way home.

I commend the Minister and his predecessor, Deputy O'Donoghue, and their officials for producing a Bill that goes much of the way towards giving a lead in how public order offences will be dealt with proactively by both the Garda Síochána and the courts.

To implement this Bill on the streets of our cities, towns and even villages, it will be necessary to bring about a major change in how the public views "public disorder". In the same way as public reaction has progressed over the past ten years from general sympathy for a drink driving offender who is caught to the case today where there is no sympathy for drink driving offenders we will need to spearhead a public information programme to seek the public's support in stamping out this menace that affects both my constituency of Dublin South-West and the entire country. All the Irish soccer stars are heroes and Robbie Keane is one of the heroes of my constituency who gives a fine example as highlighted by the media this morning. Someone like Robbie Keane should be recruited to spearhead such a campaign and continue to score more goals for the country.

This programme should be a partnership between the Department, the Garda, and the business sectors that operate in the supply of entertainment and recreation services, namely off-licences, pubs, clubs, restaurants and fast-food outlets. I listened to what was said about fast-food outlets earlier. I was regaled by the Minister's accurate description and we need to understand that.

The message should be that public order offences will no longer be shrugged off and will be treated seriously and that young people, particularly those in their late teens and early twenties, need to take personal responsibility for their actions and the consequences of their actions. To this extent the ability for a judge to exclude a convicted offender from a specified licensed premises, as defined in the Bill, to include pubs, off-licences, clubs, amusement arcades and food establishments is to be welcomed.

The Minister should, in the future, consider such exclusion orders to be the practice rather than an option, where alcohol is presented in evidence or as a defence in all criminal cases. Where the convicted offender is found to be in breach of the order a subsequent community service order or similar deterrent for the same period should be applied.

This House has an unenviable record in passing legislation into law that the people believe to be unsuccessful due to our inability to implement or sustain the enforcement of that law. The success of this Bill will depend on the resources that are given to the Garda Síochána to apply it. The agreed public consensus is that gardaí on the streets, supported by mobile units at going home time, are an essential part of the policing approach necessary to reclaim our right to get home without difficulties.

In my constituency, there is dedicated work and support of gardaí from Rathfarnham, Crumlin and Tallaght stations who cover the vast areas of Firhouse, Templeogue, Greenhills and Tallaght, but who cannot be everywhere. Many of my colleagues in this House would confirm similar difficulties all over the country. I agree with Deputy O'Sullivan in that if we do not support the Garda Síochána and uphold its right to do the job on our behalf, we are creating different systems. Whether that is in Limerick, Kerry North, Tallaght or elsewhere, that is wrong. We should not be afraid to state that and I am sorry certain parties are not here to let us hear their views on that because that is the way it should be. The right of the Garda Síochána to look after our rights should be upheld and every party in the State, certainly those represented in the Dáil, should subscribe to that view.

Tallaght is the third largest population centre in the country. Policing structures within the major population areas need to be revisited and addressed as a matter of urgency by the new Minister and his officials. All Deputies will ask the Minister to visit their constituencies, but I look forward to him coming to Dublin South-West, particularly Tallaght. We will not only talk to him about this Bill but will also show him the cramped conditions in our one Garda station and the need for a new Garda station in the west Tallaght estates. Although I am not competing with Limerick or anywhere else, I will be able to show him where more manpower and good use of Garda resources can help in fighting crime in our cities.

Returning to my earlier comment about personal responsibility, I want the Minister to say that further consideration should be given to setting up night courts and to the system of appointing and training peace commissioners who would, following the arrest of public order offenders and subject to civil liberty requirements, have the offender held in the Garda station overnight and taken to court the next day. If convicted, a fine and ban should be imposed and an offender who continues to appear before the court on similar charges should be given a custodial sentence.

The prospect that a young man – regrettably it is mostly young men – would have to spend the night in the Garda station, sober up, appear in court, need to ask the support of his family and, if convicted, be fined and suffer the embarrassment of being unable to go to his normal pub or club, will begin that change in public attitude necessary to reduce the menace of public disorder.

The fact that many cases involving a public order offence take up to nine months to come before the courts is not acceptable to the victims and is unfair on the community which has suffered the nuisance or damage, or in many cases both. The gravity of the offence by the offender has diminished by that time and is seen as a nuisance to be dealt with.

With regard to the second section of the Bill on closure orders, I commend the Minister and his officials on the broadening of the types of business covered. The pub trade is laden with legislation but we should not forget that pubs and clubs are not the only sources of alcohol. The responsibility of off-licences and supermarkets in selling alcohol also needs to be reflected.

I will have to learn, over the next five years, not to be parochial but, for the moment, I hope the Ceann Comhairle will forgive me. People are in uproar in Tallaght because, apparently, a supermarket can open an off-licence practically overnight, with no advertising and no recourse to the planning laws. In Springfield, where I live, that has greatly upset the local community, but I do not ask the Minister to legislate for Springfield estate just because Charlie O'Connor lives there. However, it is an important issue and the Minister will find many communities around the country saying the same thing. The Bill's extension of responsibility to restaurants and late night fast food outlets and other sectors is greatly overdue and will, I believe, be effective. I also support that part of the Bill that gives business owners the opportunity to remedy the problem before this "closure order" measure is needed.

The Bill gives the gardaí the ability to deal with a local problem and allows for a joint approach with the business owner to take place before a court appearance becomes necessary. I am sure all business owners will support and welcome this initiative. In my constituency, with a population larger than any of the provincial cities, we have a need for initiatives from the Minister's Department that will allow the residents of that area to rest easy at night, whether they or their children are out socialising. At the risk of repeating myself, I believe this need can best be met by a fully resourced and supported Garda force on the ground, an additional Garda station for the Tallaght area and proactive and practical legislation such as this Bill, together with the commitments outlined in An Agreed Programme for Government. I commend this Bill to the House and I am delighted to have had the opportunity to speak on it. I wish the Minister well and I look forward to engaging in further discussion as the Bill progresses through the House. Go raibh maith agat.

Mr. Ring

I congratulate the new Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and wish him well, but I have to say he has started off badly. I had expected a change from the former Minister for zero tolerance, following whose term of office there is more crime on the streets than ever and people are afraid to walk the streets of this country. I was genuinely pleased when the present Minister was appointed because I believed he was the man to take on the criminal elements. I am disappointed he allowed this Bill to come before the House without major changes being made. However, we must deal with the Bill as it stands. In wishing the Minister well, I know he now occupies the position for which he always longed. Like many of us, he started in the back benches and there were some disappointments along the way. However, there was a back door and he got to the Office of Attorney General. Now that he has got to where he wants to be, I hope he will do the job well.

In relation to this Bill, we have now reached a situation in this country where drink is generally acceptable. Everybody, including judges, seems to have great sympathy for those who come before the courts, whether as alcoholics or drunks. That is acceptable in society and we have to change that. The last Government made a great mistake in increasing the opening hours under the licensing laws. My one regret is that we in the Opposition did not have the courage to oppose that at the time. In my view, that change has created additional problems. It has caused more violence on the streets and has resulted in people being on the streets much later at night. People living in urban areas have suffered greatly as a result of the new licensing laws. Some of the late night disturbance is completely outrageous and it should never have been allowed to happen. When an individual is brought to court, having beaten up his wife and children, wrecked the house and spent all the family's money, the plea is frequently made that he has a drink problem for which we are supposed to have sympathy. Such people should be dealt with through the medical system and sent into hospital if necessary. If they continue to offend and are not prepared to reform, they must be dealt with. It is time we stopped the softly, softly approach to the problems associated with drink. There is more sympathy for those with a drink problem than those suffering from cancer. We have to realise the extent of the problems being caused by excessive drinking.

When I raised the issue of late night takeaways on a previous occasion, I got considerable media coverage and a great deal of criticism from the takeaway owners. It is commonplace to see some three or four hundred people coming out of a disco at two or three o'clock in the morning and heading to a chip shop, where they remain for another hour or two. I have seen that happening in my home town, in Castlebar and in the cities. It is quite outrageous. As well as being tanked up with drink, the new trend, to which Deputy Deasy referred earlier, is that people are also popping tablets. With the combination of Red Bull and tablets, they end up acting like bulls.

There has been much criticism of the Garda Síochána whose job, like that of teachers, is becoming more and more difficult and the people they have to deal with are becoming increasingly violent. The legal practitioners – the Minister's profession – go into court and do everything possible to embarrass the gardaí with a view to getting the thugs off. Gardaí are not professionally trained like the Minister's colleagues in the legal profession. In the presence of barristers and solicitors, people get away with telling the most blatant lies in court, while the unfortunate gardaí who do not have that legal training are put under pressure in presenting their case and defending their position. Perhaps the more senior members of the Garda have such training but the training of the ordinary members of the force is to protect the general public. They are not given the necessary resources. It is no longer good enough to send them out with their hands in their pockets. They should have batons and have the discretion to use them when necessary to put manners on unruly elements.

There is now greater sympathy for the criminal than for the citizen who is affected by crime. Offenders get free legal aid at State expense, are defended in court by the best barristers and solicitors and then get the best treatment when they go to jail. It is time we looked after those who pay their taxes, who want to live peacefully in their homes and walk our streets in safety but cannot do so because they are unprotected. Fine Gael always prided itself on being a law and order party and I am delighted we are coming back to that position. As our new spokesman has shown today, law and order will be our number one priority and that is what will get us back into Government. From what I have heard from the Minister today, I see nothing to tackle the many problems which are out there. It is time the Garda Síochána was given the resources and the necessary powers. I hope the Minister will do one other thing—

Mr. McDowell

Is the Deputy advocating a stun gun approach?

Mr. Ring

I favour dealing with the criminals. I will give the Minister an example of my own experience. On the morning of St. Stephen's Day, I found that a thug had jumped on my car during the night and kicked in the windscreen, following which he did the same to my next door neighbour's car. Six months earlier, another thug had knocked off the wing mirror of my car, which cost me £165 in old money. The gardaí caught the offender but, to this day, he has not been prosecuted and I have not been compensated for the damage to my car. Yet, there is wonderful sympathy for that type of individual. On another occasion, after I had left my house at 7 p.m. and returned at 11 p.m., I found that thugs – that is what I call them – had robbed my house. They went into the house, ransacked it and stole everything in it. When they went to court, they had free legal aid and a solicitor. When the solicitor got up in the court, I thought that the man on trial was about to be canonised as a saint, like the man canonised in Rome last week. I thought that the poor man was going to the priesthood or somewhere like that, and could not believe that this was the same thug who robbed, damaged and destroyed my house. Yet he walked away from the court. I saw him with his solicitor, who was paid for by the taxpayer and myself, and heard him described as a wonderful person.

My wife is now afraid at night in her house, as are others because their houses were broken into. Something similar happened to my next-door neighbour and there is no help or support for these people. Yet when the case I mentioned came to court, there was wonderful back-up, free legal aid, the best solicitors and when those involved went to jail, they were well looked after. What are we going to do for the people affected by crime, as these people are? Nothing is being done for them.

I want to return to CCTV cameras. It was announced in my local paper and the national press so many times that I thought there was to be a camera in every town and village. However, questions were put down in the House last year and we found that there was very little State money drawn down by local authorities because the Government had not got its act together. It is time CCTV cameras were put in place and time that criminals were identified and dealt with.

The Minister tells us that he has no control over the Judiciary. Well, he was very friendly with the Judiciary over the years and I hope that he can still speak to them, although he may not legally be able to do so. The time has come for the Judiciary to live in the real world. A judge last week said that he thought a defendant was his brother because he had appeared so many times before the judge. If the judge had dealt with the man six months before, he would not have re-appeared in court. That man would not come into court regularly if the judge was doing his job properly. He would be behind bars. I do not believe that every criminal should be behind bars but if people continue to break the law and come before the courts, Mountjoy Prison is the place for them. If they do not like Mountjoy Prison, they can be sent to Castlerea Prison and, if they do not like that, they can be sent to Loughan House.

These are the places for such people and judges would not then have such problems. Criminals like this would not appear in court if they got two years hard labour. It is time that we looked at the issue of hard labour. The Minister's colleague has taken away FÁS schemes. Instead of having those schemes, people who commit crimes should be put in yellow uniforms and made to clean up the streets. The general public will then be able to identify them and say: "That is Joe Soap who robbed Mrs. O'Malley down the road". If the public were to point the finger at these people every day, they would think twice about committing crime. The softly-softly approach has to stop as does the sympathy regarding those who drink.

We must protect the good citizens of this country. It is awful that there are old people going to bed at 7 p.m., praying that they will get through the night and will not be attacked in their homes, and that they will be able to get up in the morning alive and well. It is sad for this society that we have allowed this situation to develop and that we allow thugs to take over our streets, as they are doing. If the Minister wants to come with me, I will be delighted to walk the streets of Dublin with him or bring him to any street next Saturday night. I will take the Minister through the streets of Castlebar or Westport at 2 a.m. and will give him €50 if he walks up and down the main street of the town by himself. The Minister will not do it because he will be afraid for his life when he sees people with drinks in their hands walking up and down the street. Anything that gets in their way is taken out and this has to stop.

We must make the streets safe again so that people are free to walk them. We must encourage people to come out and walk the streets, and we must address the situation where people are going to bed at 7 p.m. with their rosary beads, praying that they will get up in the morning and not be attacked in their homes. We have to deal with the thugs and criminals and this Bill will not do that.

When new gardaí come out of Templemore, I want the Minister to make it part of their contract that they live where they are stationed. This is a simple thing. Gardaí should not be put into big Mercs with big perks; they should be put on the streets. However, if they are to be put on the streets they must have the necessary resources, and batons if they need them. If the general public and the Oireachtas support the Garda Síochána, it will do the job.

We must also address the situation surrounding free legal aid. I do not mind people getting a chance. Anybody can make a mistake and the gardaí know people might go wrong once. However, if people continually come before the courts they must be dealt with. The softly-softly approach has to stop.

In relation to late-night discos and chip shops, we must be able to bring in legislation if there are problems in these places. They now have licences and planning permission but the Garda Síochána should be given the powers to close down such places, whether for three days, ten days or ten weeks. If such premises continue to cause trouble the powers should be available to close them down. The Act talks about these places policing themselves. We do not want bouncers doing this. We saw how bouncers behave. If they are given uniforms they get carried away. As Deputy Deasy said, these people create more problems than they solve. There is only one organisation in this country to protect the people and that is the Garda Síochána.

The Minister might not know that my grandfather helped to set up this State. He was the first Assistant Commissioner of the Garda Síochána, Joseph Ring. Of course, if he had been Fianna Fáil there would be plaques all over the State for him but, because he was not, there are none. That is probably why the Minister does not know of him. The Garda Síochána was 75 years in existence last year and if one reads the history of that organisation my grandfather was well represented in it and well spoken of. He was like myself and believed in law and order. When he was needed to help clean up the State, he helped, and when he was asked to take the side of the Free State, he did. If he had been Fianna Fáil, the Minister would probably be now naming streets and barracks after him but I do not mind about that. My family was a part of history and is very proud of that.

I have always been a supporter of the Garda Síochána and do not believe its members have got the credit they deserve. Like other sections of society, gardaí get bad press and, like politics and other areas, the Garda Síochána includes the good, the bad and the ugly. We should be thankful that 99.9% of gardaí are good, honest, decent people. They do a good job without receiving great resources from the State. I hope that the Minister gets them on the street again and hope that they live where they are assigned to, whether it is Tallaght, Westport or Ballinrobe. They should get out among local communities so that they know the people there and what goes on. A part of the problem now is that gardaí are not living where they work. It would help if they did.

Ireland is the worst country in Europe in relation to drink, and particularly under-age drinking. We must do something about the drink culture, as Deputy O'Sullivan has said. If a child is born in Ireland, there is a big party; on the day of the christening, there is now a new occasion where people go to hotels and have a big drinks party; if there is a football match, the first place to go when a cup is won is into the pub; if there is a funeral, they bury the person and then it is into the pub for the day. Everything is oriented towards the pub culture and it must be stopped. It is having an awful effect on society.

Young people have never had as much money – they have too much money – and all they are concerned with is drinking. It is wonderful that they have never had to see bad times but we all know that the bad times are coming again after listening to the Minister for Finance yesterday. Perhaps it will curtail young people a little if they do not have as much money. However, we must do something about law and order. We must make our streets safe, protect the people, give the Garda Síochána the resources and get the courts to deal with those who continually break the law. The sympathy for the drink culture has to stop.

On Committee Stage, I hope the Minister makes a better effort than he did today although my party will support the Bill in principle anyway. My party spokesman will bring forward many amendments and I hope that the Minister will accept them because we all support change from the current situation. Everybody wants safe streets, and to see people protected and free to walk the streets of our towns. The Government must play its part. The previous Minister, supposedly responsible for zero tolerance, let us down and the people know that he let us down.

The current Minister is now the great white hope. I have no doubt that as a man who believes in law and order, he will make safety the number one issue and reclaim the streets from the thugs.

Ms Sexton

The purpose of the proposed legislation is to complement and strengthen the existing body of legislation, in particular, the Criminal Justice (Public Order) Act, 1994. Unfortunately, statistics have shown beyond contradiction that alcohol abuse is the single most important element in public order offences. Existing legislation has tried in vain to combat alcohol abuse, particularly among the young. In addition, the introduction of measures to close down offending licensed premises has been welcomed and does not impinge on the rights of the vast majority of law abiding licence holders.

Notwithstanding the best efforts of District Court judges, it has been the view of the Government that further measures are required. I am pleased that these proposals are now being introduced in a Bill and that provisions will be made on Committee Stage to ensure the Act comes into force within a month of being passed.

The Government recognises the fundamental rights of citizens and visitors, many of whom, unfortunately, have been assaulted and robbed. This spiralling pattern cannot be permitted to continue unabated and the Government is determined to make the appropriate legislation available to the courts by way of innovative and radical measures.

The Bill proposes that those convicted under sections 4 to 9, inclusive, of the Criminal Justice (Public Order) Act, 1994, may by order be excluded from entering or being in the vicinity of certain types of premises between specified hours. It has been recognised that fast food premises feature regularly in late night public order offences and incidents. Rather than targeting such venues, the proposed measures seek first to protect the owners of the outlets and their property and, secondly, to afford their patrons the right to frequent such places in peace and without fear.

What is refreshing about the proposed legislation is that it recognises a variety of other prem ises such as venues associated with dancing and gaming which, unfortunately, have become blackspots. Orders may relate to the user of these places and the Bill provides an expansive definition which will no longer restrict the useful work of the courts. It is of considerable benefit that those who serve sentences may face exclusion orders on release and that the sanctions are both severe and meaningful. One hopes this will act as a further deterrent for those who persist with anti-social behaviour.

The second radical measure in the Bill is the power to make closure orders on foot of an application to the courts by a member of the Garda Síochána. To be fair to licensees, the Garda is obliged in section 4(2)(a) to inform licensees that in its opinion the disorder or noise has occurred. I urge the House to consider that the obligation to inform the licensee be in writing, together with the request to take appropriate action as set out in paragraphs (a) and (b), and the possibility of extending the “reasonable period” from seven to 14 days.

These amendments would serve to eliminate confusion and obviate any misunderstandings that might arise. I urge that the notice in section 4(3) be in writing and be served by personal service or pre-paid registered post to the licensee and that the subsection be expanded to include licensees and nominees.

I suggest that section 5(5) be reconsidered. It should be a matter for the presiding judge to direct when the order commences as the approach suggested in the Bill is too cumbersome and has no defined period within which the order shall be served. With regard to section 5(6) the publication of the order in a newspaper with local circulation should be within the discretion of the presiding judge. I also suggest that the maximum fines should be increased to obviate the necessity to revisit the legislation in the near future. I also welcome the applicability of the Bill to companies.

As this is the first time I have spoken in the House, I must say that I listened with great interest to the contributions of Members on the Bill. I was surprised and alarmed by some of their comments and I am delighted that they do not have a free hand to make laws on this matter and that there are people here who would keep them in check. While I compliment Deputy Deasy on his speech, I was horrified at some of the measures, including stun guns, he wishes to have introduced to control young people who are binge drinking. This would be extremely excessive and I sincerely hope it receives the publicity it deserves in the national newspapers. As a young man, he has probably had the odd tipple himself.

The reality is that serious crime has declined significantly during the past five years with public order offences making up just 2.1% of prosecutions for criminal activity. We are losing the run of ourselves by suggesting the "hang-'em-and-flog-'em" type approach to young people. Clearly, the culture which has emerged in the past ten years, probably due to affluence and the availability of money to young people, has allowed binge drinking to occur which, unfortunately, is leading to public order offences. Nevertheless, we need to take a measured approach to legislation and examine other areas to find ways in which we can tackle underage and binge drinking. This will require moving into the realms of education and rehabilitation in the case of young people of 25 years and above given that they will not have learned that they cannot continue to live lives of binge drinking and public order offences.

I come from a town which has a fair share of chip shops open until 3 a.m. and people coming intoxicated from nightclubs and causing public order offences. However, we need to look at this issue in a balanced way which is best for all of society. While we want law and order, we do not want a police state. There is nobody running riot on the streets of my constituency at 2 a.m. or 3 a.m. waking and terrorising old people. While this perhaps happens in certain areas, the perception one would have from the comments in this Chamber is that there is no law and order. This is a reflection of the Opposition's unfair view of the Garda Síochána and the way its members perform their duties. Considerable resources have been made available to the Garda during the past five years and the Government is committed to a further increase of 2,000 in Garda numbers. This will be done in consultation with the parties concerned which means that the Garda will identify its needs to the Government, which will then act.

It would be very wrong to leave the House with the view that society has broken down and anarchy reigns. Public order offences make up 2% of the crime problem. The Bill is very balanced and fair to all concerned. It gives everyone caught up in public order problems, including those in the chip shops and public houses, a chance to try to put their house in order. Should this, coupled with education of our young people as to the dangers of binge drinking, not work, the Government will re-examine the issue to find out how we can strengthen the legislation. We have to take a step by step approach.

I am more than surprised by the contributions of some of the Opposition Members, some of whose proposals could not possibly be introduced. Is the Opposition arguing that we need to lock up and curfew young people to ensure they do not binge drink? What is required is education, an area in which significant sums of money will be directed to ensure young people understand the long-term implications of binge drinking. As I stated, these comments are not part of my prepared speech, but a response to the unexpected "hang-'em-and-flog-'em" type statements from the Opposition.

Mr. Stanton

I welcome the Minister and wish him well in his brief. I expected to hear him articulate a vision of his own or that of the Government on the serious issue of public dis order. Perhaps he will do so when he has had time to settle into his brief. I am interested to know his philosophy and vision on this area. It is of such a serious nature that perhaps he is right to take time to develop a vision regarding it.

I welcome Deputy Sexton to the House, but I bring to her attention the Minister's own words, "wanton violence, thuggery and destructiveness are increasingly obvious symptoms of a decline in public order". It was not the Opposition who said that, it was the Minister. I welcome the recognition by the Minister that there is a problem because the previous Government was in denial that a problem existed, in spite of the fact that young people across the country are increasingly afraid to go onto the streets at night. This fear has to be addressed to ensure people feel safe again. I acknowledge that, in one sense, fear can be as destructive as some of the incidents that have occurred. People are afraid because serious events have led to people being killed while there are others on life support machines in hospitals as well as those who have been badly injured. The frequency of such occurrences is on the increase.

The focus of the Bill appears to centre on two issues, the setting up of exclusion orders and closure orders. The Minister also said, "There is no greater incentive towards good behaviour than having the issue of a possible custodial sentence deferred in order to assess the capacity of a convicted public order offender to adjust his or her social behaviour to comply with decent norms". That is fine if a person is thinking rationally but as some colleagues have indicated, people who are under the severe influence of alcohol and other substances do not think rationally. The idea of a deterrent does not work when people are out at night drinking shots and taking all kinds of substances.

The Government's approach so far lacks any examination of the underlying reasons young men, in particular, feel the need to go out at night binge drinking and engaging in wanton thuggery and violence and destructiveness, to use the words of the Minister. The Minister is dealing with the symptom rather than the cause. Exclusion orders are fine but they do not deal with underage people who purchase cans of beer and spirits at a profit from older people who have bought them in off-licences. The Bill does not and cannot deal with this issue. I do not know how any legislation could.

In his speech the Minister rightly attributed some blame for the present situation to the fact that young people now have money, but although they have money they do not have facilities and activities in which to take part. Most young people will say there is nowhere to go except the pub. This is an important point, yet the vision to deal with it is sadly lacking. The Government has failed in this matter.

I tabled a parliamentary question today to the Minister for the Environment and Local Government as to whether the Government has recon sidered its policy on high density housing. During the term of the previous Government masses of houses were built without any amenities such as sports halls or playing fields. The youth service is virtually non-existent which means young people go out onto the streets at night with nowhere to go except the pub or some corner where they can buy alcohol. Peer pressure on them is enormous.

I do not want to give the impression that I am in any way soft on crime. One of the most basic rights of a citizen is to be able to walk the streets and the roads in safety but that is sadly lacking at present. We have to put in place measures to ensure people are safe, although some of them might be unpalatable. In other countries there is a high police presence in the evenings at flashpoints and while they may be somewhat intimidating in aspect they provide a necessary deterrent. However, that is not the case here where one can walk the streets at night without seeing a garda. I am not blaming the Garda, but as other Members have pointed out, we must examine whether Garda resources are being properly and fully used.

In the context of the use of Garda resources, is there a policy in the Department or the Garda hierarchy to have a form of quota system for on-the-spot fines for driving? Is it true that every Garda division is expected to forward so many thousands of euros to the Department at the end of every month, without which a sanction is imposed or they get their knuckles rapped? Does this, for example, lead to Mrs. Brown being fined £50 for doing 43 m.p.h. in a 40 m.p.h. zone when she is coming home with her shopping rather than being cautioned for exceeding the speed limit and being told to slow down the next time? I want to find out if this is Government policy, departmental policy or Garda policy. Is that the best use of Garda resources? I have seen gardaí in 40 m.p.h. zones with speed guns held out and people driving at 42 and 43 m.p.h. being stopped.

In some areas the 40 m.p.h. limit seems to extend half a mile down a dual carriageway. On coming out of Cork city towards Middleton in my constituency the 40 m.p.h. limit extends a long way down the dual carriageway. This does not make sense. A former Minister for the Environment and Local Government indicated at one point that he would change that. There is an urgent need to reassess the use of Garda resources and the need for gardaí to be visible on the streets of our towns and villages. The current policy appears to be to close down Garda stations around the country and to move gardaí out of rural villages and even some towns. I believe Mitchelstown is to be downgraded and there is also talk of downgrading the Garda station in Youghal. Will the Minister look at this policy? The Minister is new in the job. If downgrading is taking place, will he reverse that policy?

Instead of shutting down Garda stations, he should ensure there are Garda personnel in towns and villages around the country. As Deputy Ring said, gardaí who live in the larger rural areas get to know the community and the strangers. People come to them if there is something strange happening in the area. It is a bad day's work to move gardaí out of such places. Will the Minister re-examine that policy and reverse it if possible because it does not make sense?

I would like to see the gardaí being released to do the work we expect them to do – to be guardians of the peace. If possible, if there is a problem with manpower, we should engage civilian workers and personnel to do a lot of the work the Garda is tied down doing at the moment. Perhaps the Minister will examine that area and see if we can reduce the number of gardaí doing work that civilians could do in a better way.

The exclusion order stops people going into certain premises and being around certain areas. The closure order refers to closing premises and that kind of thing. I do not know how effective that will be. Will it just move the problem somewhere else? If somebody is drunk and disorderly in a certain area and one closes a premises down, will it move the problem somewhere else, concentrate it and perhaps exacerbate it in another area?

I wonder about the amount of time and resources that will be required to implement this Bill if it is to be enacted. Has the Minister looked at how much Garda time, resources, bureaucracy and paperwork will be required to implement it? It seems that it will demand an awful lot of resources. We would be better off having police on our streets rather than behind desks doing paperwork.

I know the Minister's Department is very much involved in deterring people from crime, particularly young people. I ask him to ensure that work continues because it seems to be filling a vacuum. As I said in my opening remarks, there is no adequate youth service at all. There are certainly no youth centres in most urban areas. In other words, there is no place for youngsters to go.

For instance, I was in Cobh on Monday evening and I visited a centre there, for want of a better term. It consists of one small room. There was a pool table in it, on which three or four youngsters were playing. They told me they had nowhere to go and nothing to do. In Cobh, there is no swimming pool, community centre, theatre or cinema. In a town of 12,500 people there is nothing only pubs. A Justice recently commented on the public order problem in Cobh. That is indicative of problems all over the country.

When the Minister is at the Cabinet table, will he press his colleagues to ensure that facilities such as swimming pools, sports halls and playing fields are made available in communities? Instead of building vast, sprawling housing estates and wondering afterwards what are the youngsters to do, let us plan to put in playing fields, community centres and sports halls first and then build the houses around them, like they do in other countries. That is the kind of Government vision I would like to see, which I do not see at present. I have been speaking about this in past years, but it is not happening. The problem is actually getting worse. In fact, recently in Carrigtwohill An Bord Pleanála decided – I know this is not the Government's problem – to uphold planning permission to build high-rise flats. There are no facilities for youngsters. This will haunt us in the years ahead. People in the future will ask why people in 2002 were so stupid they did not put in facilities for people.

The Minister also said in his speech that he will ensure the streets are policed. We will be watching closely to ensure that happens. We want to see increasing evidence of properly equipped police on the streets. If police have to deal with a riot, as happens, it is not right that they should merely wear a light yellow bib and a soft cap. They should be dressed properly and have proper safety equipment in case they get attacked and to prevent them from being seriously injured.

I would like the Minister to address the issue of off-licences, which I do not think is addressed in the Bill. Has the Minister any proposals at all to deal with off-licences? How does he propose to prevent people from going into off-licences, buying alcohol and selling it on to younger people? How does he propose to prevent younger people themselves going into off-licences?

What are the Minister's views on ID cards, as mentioned by Deputy Deasy? They have been spoken about for a long time and it is time that somebody grasped the nettle in this respect. We should have some form of proper identification such as cards of high quality that cannot be forged very easily.

During the election, the need for public order and people's fear in this respect comprised one of the big issues that arose in every constituency, both rural and urban. The introduction of closed-circuit television is a great help and I would like to see it used more widely.

We will be watching the Minister and the Government closely with regard to public order. This is a Band-Aid Bill. It does not do an awful lot. It will tie up resources all over the place.

We also need to put in place measures to assist young people who come out of prison. There is very little support for them and they go back into crime again. The Minister needs to address that. Recently, I came across a young man who applied for a job in a health board. Thirteen years ago he was fined for taking a jacket or something and this was held against him. He was told he could not get a job in the health board. There is something wrong in the public service when that happens. Perhaps we need to be a bit more flexible in that regard.

Perhaps the Minister might amend some of the measures in the Bill, as has been suggested even by people on his side of the House. We will wait and see what his vision and philosophy will be in the months, and possibly years, ahead.

Mr. Cuffe

I wish to share my time with Deputy Ó Caoláin.

This is a dangerous and flawed Bill. It comes at a time when the credibility of the Garda has been damaged badly in the wake of the violence of its members at the Mayday "Reclaim the Streets" demonstration. The Bill is a threat to the civil liberties of the citizens of this State. Instead of threatening chip shop owners, we should be targeting the owners of the large pubs who are serving alcohol to customers who are already drunk. The owners of these premises and their staff have an enormous responsibility, which they have obviously not honoured in the recent past. We should be targeting those super-pubs which have sprung up in recent years and which have tarnished the image of Ireland and the communities that they reputedly serve.

We should be asking the Garda why there have been no prosecutions under the Intoxicating Liquor Act instead of initiating new, dangerous and flawed legislation. There is legislation to prosecute publicans who are serving drunk individuals on their premises. However, it appears not to have been used by the Garda.

We should be looking at the real causes. We should be looking at alcohol itself and the fact that there is no health warning given with it, whether it be a bottle of whiskey or a bottle of beer. There should be some kind of health warning with alcohol because it is a dangerous and sometimes deadly drug. We should target the advertisers and providers of alcohol. Why can our national flag be tarnished by the logo of a brand, Guinness, which is owned by Diageo, a multinational company? It has defaced the national flag and allowed it to be used as an advertisement for its product. Why is the same company hanging some of the largest advertisements and banners in the history of the State to advertise a new product from its range, Ice-Cold Guinness? Why do we allow alcohol to have such domination over our culture? We should target those companies and the advertising they use. As my colleague has suggested, we should look for alternatives. We should provide amenities in communities in which there is little to do on a Friday night other than go to a large pub. In any city in Germany or France large municipal swimming pools can be found which are open until 10.00 p.m. There are decent local coffee shops and cinemas that give young people in particular an alternative to pubs.

It is ludicrous that the Minister proposes to target chip shop owners in this legislation. It is not the Burdocks, the Borzas or any owners of chip shops who should be targeted. It is those who own very large pubs. A cartel of publicans has built enormous drinking barns in which the staff cannot and do not bother to check whether their customers are drunk before they serve them. These superpubs have crept up in recent years and this Government and the previous one have done nothing to address their emergence. It has perpetuated the situation and it has perpetuated the cartel that controls and dominates the licensing industry.

It is a dangerous step to introduce new criminal justice or public order legislation because there has been an increase in the use of this legislation against political protesters. Those charged under the current legislation in recent months include members of the Irish Anti-War Movement and cyclists, who were charged on 22 September last year – which was supposed to be European Car Free Day. This is a dangerous precedent and it is a step in the wrong direction to introduce new legislation that could be abused in this manner. Not only last September but also more recently, on May Day in Dublin, we saw members of the public charged under the criminal justice legislation – members of the public who were taking part in a Reclaim the Streets demonstration. All of these were peacefully protesting about issues of immediate concern to the public, yet the Minister appears to be giving the gardaí enhanced powers in this regard. Even in recent weeks, employees of the clamping company, Control Plus, were arrested under the public order legislation. I know the clampers in Dublin are not everybody's favourite people but to charge members of Control Plus under this legislation is to set a bad precedent.

Instead, we should be breaking down the cartel that controls the very large pubs from which most of the problems emanate. My party's submission to the Commission on Liquor Licensing suggested that we need to retain the small-scale family pub where the owner is the operator and knows who is drinking, who is not, who is drinking too much and when to stop serving. This is preferable to drinking barns that pay minimum wages and have all the atmosphere of an airport departure lounge, where the person serving behind the counter has no idea how intoxicated the customer is.

In short, we need to pass on more responsibility to the owners of these premises, reform the Garda and break up the cartels. The citizens and chip shop owners of this State should not be targeted with this retrogressive legislation. Instead, we should target alcohol advertising and create more amenities for the communities in which there is little to do in the evening other than go to the local pub. The focus should also be on city and county managers who give permission for enormous superpubs and the gardaí should be charged with using their existing responsibilities more wisely. Citizens should not be targeted by this legislation.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

Ba mhaith liom comhgairdeas a dhéanamh leis an Aire. Seo an chéad sheans a bhí agam labhairt leis.

Mr. McDowell

Go raibh maith agat.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

I am hoping against hope that the common note that I will strike in relation to the Bill before us this evening will set a pattern for the future. Like one earlier speaker, I am not absolutely convinced of that, but time will tell. This legislation responds to the growing scourge of anti-social behaviour, including violent assaults and murders, associated with late night drinking. We do not need statistics to tell us the extent of this scourge in our cities and towns and even in rural areas. Anyone who goes out for a social drink nowadays will have experienced, directly or directly, the type of behaviour that instils fear and makes our streets unsafe. The behaviour of a small but violent minority of people has made socialising a less relaxed and less enjoyable experience for the majority. For many people, particularly older people, who live in the neighbourhood of pubs, clubs and hotels where this behaviour can be at its worst, a night-time rest, even in their own homes, is unknown at weekends. Rowdiness at all hours of the night and damage to homes is common and my own mother, a senior citizen, has experienced this. I am speaking from that perspective. For older people the weekend can often be one long nightmare.

Hoteliers and publicans, while neither solely nor wholly responsible, must nevertheless take more responsibility for what goes on in and around their premises. They must take more responsibility for the state of intoxication of their patrons. By and large, the licensed trade in this country is hugely profitable. There are now bigger and more profitable clubs, pubs and hotels than ever before. That is broadly welcome. There have never been more people out socialising at weekends and there has never been more money to spend. All of these are equally welcome. It must be said that the majority of young people who spend their hard-earned money at weekends act responsibly and with respect for other members of the community. The minority responsible for anti-social behaviour are by no means all young people. This is something that needs to be emphasised, for fear of young people as the sole perpetrators becoming the focus of this debate. That is anything but the truth.

The knee-jerk reaction from some quarters is simply to blame alcohol and urge further restrictions on its sale and on opening hours. The logical extension of that is the mentality which led to the disastrous experiment of Prohibition in the USA. During the last Dáil the opening hours of pubs were extended. I have heard very few people arguing that the extended hours led to more of the type of behaviour we are addressing in this Bill. I do not believe that the extended hours worsened the situation. They may even have eased it to some extent. I will repeat what I said at the time the legislation was passed – we should aim for even fewer restrictions on opening times.

One of the main reasons for the concentration of violent drunken behaviour in the early hours of the morning is that venues are all spilling out intoxicated patrons at the same time. We must consider open-ended arrangements and, if the Minister will pardon the pun, staggered closing times to reduce the concentration of crowds in the early hours. I have no objection in principle to most of the penalties set out in this Bill including the power to exclude persons convicted of certain offences from named premises and the power to place restrictions on premises. However, I will revisit the detail of others because the focus is perhaps misdirected. We will have an opportunity to address this in greater detail on Committee Stage.

One of the principal problems is the failure of the Garda Síochána to implement existing legislation. There may be a variety of reasons for this, including a lack of manpower and resources and there may also be a certain unwillingness at some levels and in some places. The Garda now has wide powers in the area of public order but we have, unfortunately, seen these powers abused in certain high profile cases in pursuit of personal grudges against individuals or against certain licensed premises where an even-handed approach is not applied. We all know instances from our local communities where this mentality has been demonstrated on numerous occasions. I do not think there is a town in the country in which people cannot identify those pubs in which a late drink can be acquired and those in which one cannot. We want to see an even-handed approach and the existing laws applied fairly. At the same time, reasonable powers already in the hands of the Garda are often not applied.

There is a clear need to ensure the presence of an adequate number of gardaí, properly resourced, at and nearby local venues where local knowledge will inform the level of policing required. Most people would support this measure, as previous speakers have done. I have seen the difference that approach has made when representations were made through a local chief superintendent to provide for a presence at a particular spot where there were recurring offences. Due to the physical presence of gardaí, people were not subjected to anti-social behaviour but when it was withdrawn, the problems recurred.

Why can we not have greater numbers of properly trained and skilled gardaí on our streets dealing effectively with problems at the times when local knowledge has established are the worst? This is when we need proper utilisation of the resource the Garda Síochána provides in terms of service to the communities.

This Bill does not address the problem whereby so-called "bouncers" are often the perpetrators of violence and the cause of trouble at venues. Legislation in this regard is promised and is long overdue because it is well known that a blind eye by the gardaí is often turned to the crimes of bouncers which can only further poison the climate of menace and violence on our streets at night.

We must also address the wider social context – something a limited Bill such as this cannot hope to do. Issues which need to be addressed in our CPSE classes in secondary schools include our attitude to alcohol and the reality of older people's fears. The view I express concerning opening times is not one of contraction but rather a freeing up of the situation for the logical reasons of management of premises, security on our streets and the inadequacy of public transport. Lack of transport is particularly critical in our towns and cities as it gives rise to crowds and an interface between people who have probably long passed the ability to reason any situation. It is vital to ensure people are brought home safely from venues late at night. I hope this new Dáil and this Minister will address these matters in a serious and determined manner and I look forward to further engagement on this Bill as it progresses through the Houses of the Oireachtas.

Ms Burton

I congratulate the Minister on his appointment and I wish him – perhaps not joy – but an interesting time in office. As previous Deputies have said, the question of public order in relation to drinking and the late night violence which has so disfigured streets, towns and villages across the country is one of the worst problems that faces Irish society. Unlike many of the problems that relate to criminality and anti-social behaviour, it is not confined simply to one section of the community. It is remarkable how ill-behaved even well-off people can be when they have consumed excessive quantities of drink. The usual analysis that crime and anti-social behaviour is caused by social deprivation is obviously not the case in relation to the squalor and disorder of the problems given rise to by excessive drinking.

This Bill is, however, a classic sticking plaster with much detail about what to do after a crime has been committed but almost nothing about what can be done to solve the causes of this type of crime and anti-social behaviour. As other Deputies have said, the Bill contains no provision for reducing alcohol consumption or for providing alternative facilities, particularly for young adults and older teenagers who are the key people caught up in this problem. One of the concerns I have in relation to the Bill is in the section dealing with the exclusion order and perhaps the Minister will deal with this on Committee Stage. There are no details of what the gardaí or the courts should take into account when deciding on an exclusion order which is a draconian power if and when it is used. A number of cases are outlined in the Minister's speech and in the memorandum about when exclusion orders may be used or when they may be indicated or requested by the gardaí, but this is unsatisfactory because one must ask if these arbitrary decisions about exclusion orders are made by gardaí perhaps based on bias?

This brings us to the question of the approach of the gardaí to policing and theirs powers. All of us who serve communities where there is a great deal of anti-social behaviour, crime and disorder know that the only real way to deal with the prob lem is to have sufficient numbers of gardaí patrolling the streets and getting to know the communities. There is no other solution to this problem. In cities in the United Kingdom and particularly in America, the only thing that has worked in terms of solving this problem is a return to community-based policing. Such a method of policing would be particularly effective in tackling the problems of public disorder arising from excessive consumption of alcohol. My constituency of Dublin West, including Blanchardstown, now has a population larger than that of the city of Limerick, which is in the constituency of the Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy O'Dea. This urban area, larger than Limerick city, has just one Garda station. During the lifetime of the last Government, this area lost more than a third of its community policing service. Instead we have a Fiat Panda, the pride and joy of our police force in Dublin 15, which occasionally travels around with two to four gardaí on board. Having driven around various estates all night, it is inevitable that, when the gardaí go to the scene of a disturbance they will not be able to establish the real cause of any problem. Because they are covering too much ground, they are losing the ability to have any indepth knowledge of the communities they are policing. They have no way of distinguishing between those people who are continuous offenders and those who are merely congregating in a place. On occasion, the gardaí will get it wrong, therein sparking the development of huge resentment among younger people who feel they have been wrongly accused of wrongdoing. I feel sorry for those younger members of the force who are asked to deal – in what I feel is a very poor manner – with and manage situations that develop on our streets.

In an area such as Blanchardstown, and in most of the developing areas around each of our cities, one will not find a small local pub. Instead, we have what have been correctly described in Africa as "beer halls". We are not talking about a pub with 50 or 100 patrons consuming a drink in a neighbourhood environment where the publican is in a position to have a reasonable knowledge of who the customers are and what threat they may pose. Instead, we have pubs which are built for hundreds, and in some cases thousands, of patrons. In Dublin 15, a pub licence will not be granted to any development of less than 2,500 to 3,000 houses. That is the planning norm. It follows the guidelines set down by the Department of the Environment and Local Government. If we are serious about addressing the problem of drink-related public order offences, we must question this policy of building enormous beer halls. It is too difficult for anyone, including the Garda, to police these venues effectively.

A consequence of this proliferation of beer halls has been the increase in the hiring of large numbers of bouncers. Bouncers decide, for reasons best known to themselves, whether they like the look of somebody or not. When they decide to refuse admission to a person, resentment builds up and we all know about the type of violent incident which can then occur – such incidents have featured prominently in the newspapers. We are placing this additional resource out there in place of Garda power and suggesting to the public that this will solve our problems. I do not think this is a solution. In some situations, if the gardaí do not use these new powers in a sensitive manner they will only exacerbate the problem.

In the section which deals with the venues and locations that will be subject to this legislation, I notice that chip shops and chip vans are mentioned. I do not have a problem with that. In some parts of Dublin, chip vans sell more than just chips. In other areas, such vans are well-run and provide an essential service, particularly in new housing estates where there are no other facilities. However, this legislation does not mention those merchants who go around the estates selling drink. Anybody who represents a Dublin constituency is well aware of this phenomenon. These people are driving around in vans selling drink and they do not care about the age of their customers. As with the sale of contraband cigarettes, such illegal behaviour is very often part of larger criminal networks, yet it is not included in this legislation. These vans are not included in the list of bodies which will be targeted by this legislation. I presume that the Minister would argue that, as such vans are illegal in the first place, additional legislation is not necessary. However, why not target what is one of the biggest causes of this public order problem?

The granting of further powers to the Garda highlights the even greater need for accountability and transparency in that organisation. The Labour Party has, as the Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform is aware, already proposed detailed legislation in relation to the accountability of the Garda Síochána, including a police ombudsman. For the sake of the members of the force who are being asked to carry out these new measures, we must have better accountability. We do not know what the Government's detailed proposals in relation to the inspectorate are. This could be another example of dead-letter legislation or it could be implemented reasonably and carefully by the Garda. It could also be abused and implemented in an unfair way.

Until we address the issue of community-based policing, we are not going to get any solution to the problems addressed by this legislation. There are not enough meetings with public representatives. Things are slightly better in my own area because I have finally persuaded the local garda superintendent to meet members of the local council roughly every three months. All of the political parties take part in these meetings, where the superintendent gives a detailed report of the incidence of this type of crime in our area and we have a discussion about what can be done about it. This is useful, but it is purely informal and is down to the goodwill of the gardaí in my particular area. There is no reason why this model can not be extended across the rest of the State. At least we could then discuss these problems. We could ask why there are no gardaí outside a particular pub or take-away at night, if these places are the source of disturbance.

Hospital accident and emergency departments are like war zones. At the weekends and on Thursday nights also, the facilities of hospitals such as the James Connolly Memorial Hospital in Blanchardstown are taken up by people suffering from the effects of excessive consumption of alcohol. Many health care professionals are concerned by this. Owners of large licensed premises continue to serve drink to people who have clearly already consumed too much alcohol. Such people should not be encouraged to purchase more drink. In parts of Scandinavia, there is an onus on publicans to ensure that people who are drunk are not served any more alcohol. In some cases, action can be taken against publicans who continue to serve such customers.

The experiment of the extension of pub opening hours is one we need to re-examine. There is an argument for it in certain areas but not in residential areas where there are very large pubs and very late opening hours. One must remember that, under planning laws, the average take-away may stay open for an hour and a half after the last pub closes. That means that in parts of Blanchardstown village, for instance, the last take-away can close at around 3.30 a.m. That is simply too late. Where there are people who have consumed a lot of drink queuing, it is a focus for disorderly conduct and indeed for some of the tragic incidents we have witnessed.

I find the lack of emphasis by the Government on how to deal with a reduction in alcohol consumption, particularly among younger people, disappointing. We have not as yet addressed the question of the advertising of alcohol which is critical to its popularity. Next September and October, as in every other year, all our major universities and third level institutions will offer cheap drink to students through all sorts of clubs and societies. As somebody who occasionally speaks at clubs and societies, it is almost impossible to get a non-alcoholic drink. People would look at one as if one had two heads if one suggested one might like water or, God forbid, worst of all, tea or coffee. We have a responsibility to start to change that culture, particularly in the case of a lot of women students. I say that as somebody who has worked in the third level area. I find it sad that many younger women are in a social environment in which they are almost forced to compete round for round with men very often drinking shorts.

There are also these new drinks, including the combination of vodka and Red Bull and so on. As other speakers have said, one would not like to say what condition a young person who has consumed three or four vodkas and Red Bulls would be in because that combination contains a very high level of caffeine plus alcohol. It is a combination which publicans should neither be encouraged nor allowed to sell to young people.

The difference between our drink culture and that of most of our European counterpart countries is that when people drink, they also have something to eat whereas people here go out on the town for the evening having had nothing to eat. Even in eastern European countries, people are at least served bread and bread sticks in pubs so they are eating something. The impact of alcohol consumption is less than here, where people drink very often having eaten little all day and by the time closing time comes they are in an appalling state.

I understand the Minister's intention in trying to address the problems of alcohol but this Bill is, as I said earlier, a bit of a sticking plaster in that it addresses the aftermath of the problem and crimes after they have been committed. If we are to get real about the problems of alcohol, we need to address the question of alcohol consumption, the advertising of alcohol and our planning laws and how they provide only for these large beer halls around the country. We also have to strike a balance between the interests of a small number of very large companies which now control the licensed trade and the interests of publicans with smaller family-sized pubs because, certainly in the greater Dublin area, there does not seem to be room for them anymore which is regrettable.

Mr. Haughey

I welcome the publication of this Bill and the discussion on Second Stage. A wide variety of views have been expressed so far in the debate and that is very constructive. I have no doubt the 29th Dáil will be a very interesting one given what we heard to date in the debates which have taken place. At the outset, I congratulate the Minister of State, Deputy O'Dea, on his appointment and wish him well in his new role.

This Bill makes provision for exclusion orders to be imposed on a person facing conviction for a public order offence. It also allows for closure orders in regard to places where alcohol is sold and other places specified. These are necessary measures to deal with the problems of public disorder being experienced in our cities, towns and communities. In the recent general election crime, yet again, emerged as a very important issue of concern to the electorate. However, it is a certain type of crime which people want tackled effectively. The quality of life of our citizens is seen to be threatened by public disorder and anti-social behaviour generally by gangs, underage drinking, vandalism and lawlessness and by unprovoked attacks. This Bill aims to tackle these issues.

It must also be said that there are problems in relation to so-called "joy-riding" in many suburban areas and separate measures will have to be taken to deal with this matter. The Garda say there is adequate legislation in place to deal with the unauthorised taking of a vehicle. That may be the case but there is no doubt that so-called "joy-riding" is a menace in many of our communities and the Garda will have to adopt specific measures to deal with this problem in certain areas and encourage and become involved in activities to prevent young people from engaging in this very dangerous practice.

In our communities parents, for example, are worried about their children going into the city centre at night for an evening's entertainment. Elderly people are afraid to go to and from Saturday evening Mass in some parishes of Dublin and elsewhere. Local parks and greens have, on occasion, become no-go areas for the residents of the locality. We are all familiar with these experiences in our role as public representatives. These gangs cannot be allowed to destroy community life as we have known it.

As I have said previously in this House, the substantial economic growth of the past few years has literally transformed our society and I do not think we can underestimate the changes which have taken place in the last five years. The make up of this Dáil demonstrates the changes. New issues and new challenges have emerged which have to be tackled by Government. Young people are more affluent and it could be said in the context of the discussion on this Bill that some young people have too much money at their disposal. Alcohol consumption has increased and, directly related to this, late night public disorder has now become an issue of genuine concern.

In addition, there is a new aggression in our society and this has resulted in unprovoked attacks, random violence and street assaults generally against young people, particularly young men. This too must be a real worry given that often there does not seem to be a reason for these attacks. The enactment of this Bill will give the Garda some of the extra powers they need to combat this difficult situation.

I pay tribute to the outgoing Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy O'Donoghue. He introduced a great deal of legislation to deal with crime and he implemented a wide range of practical measures to fight it. His efforts to break up the drug gangs and to target the assets of the drug barons were especially effective. Only a short time ago it could be said that these so-called untouchables represented a real threat to our democracy. I wish Deputy O'Donoghue well in his new role and in his new Department.

Several speakers referred to gardaí on the beat. Crime is a complex issue and resources must be deployed in many different ways to deal with the problem in its totality. Putting more gardaí on the beat seems likes a simplistic issue, yet it is what the people want and demand. It would go a long way in dealing with the type of crime addressed in this Bill. There are many complex matters to be addressed when dealing with crime generally, for example, white collar crime, or more recently crimes relating to pornography, etc., about which there has been much publicity. The Garda need specialised training to deal with these matters. However, ultimately, the simple solution demanded by people throughout the years of putting more gardaí on the beat is the way to proceed to secure the right kind of climate for dealing with crime and the types of crime addressed in this Bill.

I welcome the commitment in the programme for Government to increase the strength of the Garda by 2,000. This will ensure a more visible Garda presence in our towns, cities and communities. I also welcome the policy, outlined in the programme for Government, to introduce a community warden service. This will free the gardaí to deal with other activities, including the types of crime associated with public disorder. I hope the introduction of such a system will be done speedily and that the necessary measures will be approved by the House as soon as possible.

Reference has been made to community policing and the role of the community sergeant or garda. I support the Garda community scheme. We need to be totally committed to it. The active involvement of gardaí in the community is of fundamental importance when dealing with crimes of public disorder and I hope the Garda Commissioner and the Garda are committed to community policing. In my constituency community sergeants and gardaí have been in place for many years. It is clear they are crucial to dealing with juvenile and other types of crime.

However, in other districts community Garda personnel change every few months, which is unsatisfactory and defeats the purpose of the scheme. Community gardaí must be part of the community and be in place for several years so that they get to know an area. The Garda Commissioner should be committed to promoting this if the scheme is to work effectively.

Operation Oíche and, more recently, Operation Encounter are welcome measures which aim to deal with problems of public disorder. I hope they will be maintained and promoted on a long-term basis. They have good aims and objectives and are necessary to address specific problems.

I referred to the changes that have occurred in society. A change of much concern to me is the general lack of respect towards gardaí. There has been an across the board decline in respect for authority and authority figures, such as politicians, church leaders and the elderly. I have witnessed the decline in respect to the Garda on many occasions. Young gardaí especially appear to be unable to stand up for themselves at times. At public meetings they are subjected to discourtesy and abuse, not only from the young but also from middle aged citizens. This must be nipped in the bud. The Garda has a role to play and are backed up by the Constitution and the laws enacted in this Parliament. The Garda Commissioner should address this problem. While the Garda have to deal with problems at a macro level, in their day to day activities we must restore the respect shown to gardaí to ensure they can fulfil their role.

Many communities and parishes do not have community centres or youth cubs. This creates a problem because often the local pub is the only venue in which to hold meetings or conduct community activities. However, many of the problems referred to in this debate occur in pubs and in view of this it is unhealthy when communities have no alternative community venues. The problem must be addressed. During the term of the previous Government the then Departments of Social, Community and Family Affairs and Tourism, Sport and Recreation made funding available for family resource centres, community development programmes and for sports and community facilities generally. I would like to see the new Ministers expand and develop these programmes. For example, the young people's services and facilities fund has played a major role in this area.

Debate adjourned.