Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 20 May 2009

Vol. 683 No. 1

Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2009: Second Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

I referred to the Minister's knife awareness campaign before the debate adjourned, which was announced last February with a great fanfare of publicity, a budget of €200,000, a promise of a series of road shows, schools visits, and a nationwide advertising campaign. As part of the campaign, the Minister promised to build a presence on the social networking sites. This was the new message delivery approach from the Minister, but it has failed. The campaign's Bebo site has been viewed only 329 times since January and not one person engaged in the on-line poll. The campaign's Facebook site has 39 members, while the campaign on Twitter has a following of 16 members. There are 170,000 people in this country aged between 18 and 20. The dedicated campaign website www.howbigdoyoufeel.ie has not been updated and only refers to one public meeting that took place before the Minister even launched the campaign. The social networking sites reveal no details of the public meetings, no details of the road shows, and it would appear that no campaigning has taken place at all. Community gardaí could be working on this issue on the ground, but the national campaign is not working, even though it needs to be to enforce the seriousness of knife crime. This is an area where the Minister has not shown himself to be proactive. There has been total failure to meet the target audience, and a form of action is needed to address the sharp rise in knife crime.

I am pleased the Minister has finally decided to outlaw the use of the samurai sword, which is a vicious implement. I cannot think of any other reason that a samurai sword would be brandished, other than to inflict injury on individuals. The swords are used as a macho badge of honour by males in this city and beyond. It is still possible to walk into a shop in this city, purchase a samurai sword and any array of deadly weapons for less than €100. The easy availability of these swords has facilitated some vicious crimes in recent years. One example was the brutal attack in a Finglas pub in 2008, when a man's hand was sliced off in full view of the other customers.

Section 18 deals with the European arrest warrant, and it makes provision for arrest without warrant. If I understand it correctly, this provision will only become operational once the Schengen information system is put in place. It may be some time before this occurs. An important aspect of the Bill is the provision that allows the Garda Síochána the power to take fingerprints, photographs, and palm prints of persons arrested for comparison purposes with the European arrest warrant. Until now, the Garda Síochána could not do this and it will make the process more efficient. It is important that while the changes may enhance the operation of the European arrest warrant regime, we need at the same time to safeguard the rights of people whose surrender is sought on foot of the warrant.

Part 3 deals with the Schengen information system. Can the Minister advise us on our involvement in this? The European Commission indicated in 2007 that the central system would be ready by the end of 2008, but we are now mid-way into 2009. I know further issues emerged that need to be addressed before the system can become operational, but much of this Bill is dependent on the operation of the Schengen information system and our involvement therein. I would have thought that central to this involvement is the setting up of the DNA database here, which will be a key factor in improving the abysmal conviction rate in this country for serious crime. It is fundamental that all member states of the EU should maintain a DNA database and participate in sharing information on this. The Minister has indicated his intention to publish the legislation during this session, and I look forward to it. However, as in the Thornton Hall debacle, there are cost implications here. For example, how prepared is our "Pulse" system for participation in such an EU friendly database?

There are additional provisions in the Bill that I will not go into. This debate was scheduled to start earlier and there is further justice legislation to be dealt with, so I will come back to these issues on Committee Stage. They include the matter of firearms dealers with valid tax clearance certificates, the issue of imitation guns and the restriction of imitation sporting guns by using colour codes. I notice the Minister appears to have changed his mind on the issue of credit card skimming.

I welcome this Bill. The most controversial aspect is related to the handgun issue. It is important that we acknowledge that there is a fairly rigorous regime in place already for the sporting use of such guns. When the Minister speaks of handgun culture and avoiding a Dunblane type situation here, he needs to acknowledge that there is a fairly secure regime already in operation and that genuine sports shooters acknowledge that there must be a robust licensing system in place for club membership rules. A regime can be put together that is transparent and subject to appropriate Garda vetting and examination. I look forward to resuming the debate on these matters on Committee Stage.

In so far as it updates the criminal law, the Labour Party supports this Bill. We also support bringing into effect the Council decision on the establishment and operation of the Schengen information system. Whereas the greater part of the Bill is concerned with the European arrest warrant system, and with amending the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003, I suspect that the sections concerned with amending the Firearms Acts 1925 to 2006 will be most promoted for public attention. The public reaction, which is not surprising given the frequency of the resort to the use of illegal weapons in our society, will be to welcome any measures that promise to tackle gun crime. On closer scrutiny, whereas the Bill reforms the law in the matter of the possession of firearms, the link to restricting the weapons available to criminal gangs is harder to find. I will return to this point.

I accept the conclusions of the experts and of those at the coalface that this Bill will tighten up and improve the operation of the European arrest warrant system and surrender procedures. However, I am bound to admit that I do not have available to me the knowledge or backup to evaluate in detail the procedures being put in place under the amendments. I do not believe the procedures put in place by the Oireachtas generally are adequate to scrutinise some of the measures that originate in Europe. Perhaps, as we search for a modern day role for Seanad Éireann, that House could be provided with the meaningful role of scrutinising measures referred by Europe.

A number of miscellaneous issues tacked on to the Bill appear broadly acceptable. However, Committee Stage will offer an opportunity to examine them in greater detail. In addition, the Minister has promised a number of additional amendments, the shape of which we do not yet know and as such we will have to wait until we have sight of them before commenting. On the point I made earlier in regard to research and backup, I take this opportunity to state that the Oireachtas Library and Research Service made contact this morning with a digest on this Bill, which is quite helpful and should be acknowledged. The Bill has been moved through the House with some speed. I believe we should acknowledge that service from the library.

I return now to the supposition I made when drafting my contribution on this Bill. Notwithstanding the fact that the greater part of the Bill is taken up with the European arrest warrant system and the new procedures, including the miscellaneous matters to which the Minister referred at the end of his speech, it is the measures to deal with firearms that are being promulgated. The Minister tore into his Second Stage speech at speed, a copy of which we did not have, and had envisaged all types of horrors by the time we caught up with him.

Many people outside this House will be under the impression, from what the Minister said, that the Bill deals with the incidents of resort to violent weapons we have seen in recent years, particularly firearms, on the streets of some urban areas of Ireland and will clamp down on the availability of weapons to criminal gangs. That is the impression people will have. We will need to tease out this matter in more detail on Committee Stage.

When I heard the Minister's first statement my reaction was similar to that of most citizens, namely, any measure that restricts access by the criminal fraternity to firearms is a good measure. It goes without saying that anybody committed to the rule of law would not be against measures to reasonably control guns. Every week, almost without exception, we awake to the loss of life as a result of the use of guns by feuding criminal gangs. The subliminal message from the Minister was that his new legislative proposals will tackle the availability of weapons to criminal gangs. The more one examines the Bill, the more one finds the Minister's proposals will have virtually no impact on the use of or access to firearms by criminal gangs. Rather, it will have significant impact on law-abiding citizens who are members of gun clubs and hold licensed weapons in supervised conditions. The evidence is that criminals do not get their hands on guns used by such clubs. We have the Minister's word on this in response to parliamentary questions. Sporting and gun clubs are not the source of guns for criminal gangs. The Minister's replies to parliamentary questions show that there is no credible evidence to link legally held handguns with crime of any kind.

The Minister, as recently as 22 April, in response to a question on the subject to my colleague, Deputy Ruairí Quinn, made clear that it was not possible to say precisely how many formerly legally held handguns have been used in criminal offences. The Minister in his speech today, a copy of which I did not have at the time — the Minister will be aware we have had little time to read it given we have been dealing with another Bill in committee — stated that a number of handguns have been stolen from licence holders. These guns by definition are immediately in criminal hands. This is an important issue. There is a hell of a difference between that response and the answers we have been given up to now.

A relatively small number — I am advised the figure is approximately 1% — of firearms in the country are legally held handguns in the possession of sporting clubs in rigorously prescribed conditions, the licence holders of which have been vetted by the Garda Síochána. These particular firearms are held for the purpose of participation in legitimate legal sporting disciplines and international competition. Some individuals have more than one licensed handgun because different sporting disciplines require the use of different types and calibre of handgun. Taking all this into consideration, it is estimated that we are probably dealing with approximately 500 to 600 individual handgun licence holders and not the proliferation of handguns suggested.

The question is whether there is any evidence that some of these pistols find their way into the hands of the criminal fraternity. The Minister, as recently as 22 April, in the parliamentary question to which I referred earlier, told the Dáil that 31 handguns had been recorded as stolen since 2004 and that: "[I]t is not possible to say precisely how many formerly legally held handguns had been used in criminal offences." It appears there is no evidence to show that legally held handguns or stolen legally held handguns have been used in the commission of any crime. I am open to correction from the Minister on that point. There is no evidence that I can find, including from the Minister.

The Labour Party fully supports the law being brought up to date in the matter of the licensing of firearms, their security and their use. We do not, however, support measures purportedly introduced to tackle crime being used to put legitimate sports clubs out of business. The sport of handgun target shooting in Ireland is not insignificant and is a dimension of indigenous rural business in some counties. If there was evidence that handguns used in any of the 40 plus shooting ranges were finding their way into the hands of criminals using firearms in our estates and on our streets, the Labour Party would support the banning of handguns. However, no such evidence exists.

On closer scrutiny of this part of the Bill it would appear that the manner of framing critical sections is a knee-jerk reaction by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform following recent terrible shooting tragedies, particularly in Limerick. The spin being put out by agents of the Minister is to the effect that he is taking tough action on gun control which will help put the feuding gangs out of business. On closer scrutiny it is clear that the principal casualties of the Bill will be law abiding citizens who use licensed handguns for legitimate sporting purposes after submitting to rigorous assessment by the Garda Síochána. This part of the Bill therefore requires a fundamental rethink and revision. The Minister is smiling and I am always happy to put a smile on his face, but I refer him to some typical correspondence——

He is in good humour today.

Deputy Rabbitte, himself, is not averse to lobbying.

No. I never have. I am quite prepared to have my mind changed. It is just that the parliamentary question the Minister has answered——

It is a deep distortion of my position to say that I am doing this as a reaction to what has happened in Limerick or that it is a panacea to deal with organised crime. It is not.

The Minister will have the opportunity to reply at the end of the debate.

I have just listened to the Minister for two hours in a different forum today on the Defamation Bill during which he told us how hard put upon he was and all the terrible things that are being said about him now that he wants to reintroduce the offence of blasphemy. He said that he is regarded as a fundamentalist Catholic, an extreme right-winger, looking for votes, courting the Islamic community and all this. I never said any of those things about him.

I did not say Deputy Rabbitte did.

I believe he has been reading the Phoenix.

I do not know why the Minister is getting so defensive here. I am merely putting to him during the Second Stage debate the representations we are getting. For example, I received a letter from a citizen — I could give the Minister his name if he wanted as I do not suspect there is any secrecy about it. He stated:

I have participated in the shooting sports since 1990, representing my country Internationally on many occasions, most recently the World Hand Gun Championships in Indonesia in 2008.

This bill will have no effect on the increase in serious crime in Ireland, as has already been acknowledged by Minister Ahern. The only persons who will be affected will be the law abiding citizens of this State. The Bill is grossly unjustified, unfair, and will not have the effect the Minister is seeking.

The banning of licenced handguns in particular is an effort to seek a solution to a problem that does not exist. Every licenced owner of a firearm in the State has been vetted by An Gardai Siochana, and in particular persons who posses hand guns.

There has been NO alarming increase in hand gun licences since 2004. The Ministers is incorrect in his extrapolation of the increase over the coming years. As a member of a shooting club with a membership of 150 persons, those of us who are interested in competing with hand guns already have a licensed hand gun. As with every new item that comes to the market, there is always an increase of acquisition in the beginning. In fact, there are far fewer licenced hand guns in the State today then there were in 1972, when hand guns were last licensed [for the reasons we know].

I must also protest in the strongest terms the comparison between Irish shooters and the situation in the United States. [The Minister made that comparison today.] There is not a "hand gun culture" among Irish shooters, as the Minister repeatedly states. If there are 1,800 Porsche cars in the country do we also have a Porsche culture? There is, however a passion for our sport. The Minister would be far more accurate in comparing us to our neighbours in the rest of the European Union. Every other EU country, bar the United Kingdom, recognise the shooting sports as a valid sport, and also recognise hand guns as valid sporting tools. Only this year both the Danish and Swedish Ministries of Justice recognised Practical Shooting as a legitimate and safe sport.

The letter continues for another page. To be honest, I know very little about it, but that is what he states. Apparently there are approximately 40 ranges around the country and he says that shooters are very serious upstanding citizens, vetted by the Garda Síochána. It is an expensive sport and they are not the kinds of chaps who leave their guns lying around. Most critically of all there is no evidence I can point to that suggests the criminal gangs that are marauding in urban parts of Ireland are sourcing their weapons from these law-abiding citizens, who are in those shooting clubs. I would like the Minister to address that issue. If he has information to the contrary, I will withdraw my opposition and happily go along with the provisions in the Bill.

The big point that really jolted me this morning when the Minister was speaking was when he said that we have a gun culture.

No. I am trying to prevent a gun culture becoming the norm in society.

I agree with the Minister entirely on that. However, I honestly believe that language loses its meaning if we suggest that is what we have. Is there a country in the entire EU that is more rigorous about the licensing of firearms than ours? I do not believe there is. I am very happy to modernise the law and tighten it up further. However, until the Minister persuades me to the contrary, I have very serious reservations about the impact on respectable law-abiding citizens engaged in a sport, which does not attract me personally. It is a sport that is recognised internationally and shooters compete internationally. The Bill contains provisions about prohibiting certain kinds of weapons and provisions about slowing down the renewal of licences, which they believe will cause them gradually to go out of business.

Laws are cheap and so is the publicity Ministers can get. However, we also need investment in the service that enforces those laws. Garda numbers were set to reach almost 15,000 by the end of 2009. However, because of early retirements and drastically reduced recruitment this figure will not now be reached. Reforms are desperately needed in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform to bring the numbers back up. We desperately need gardaí walking the beat, visible on public transport and visiting schools. We need gardaí visible in communities they know and serving people they know in order to make a real impact on crime and anti-social behaviour.

It is also to be regretted that the Minister has ignored the opportunity presented by the introduction of this legislation to respond to High Court criticism of the hotchpotch nature of our law on firearms as it stands. The court as recently as 4 July 2008 criticised the piecemeal spreading over multiple pieces of legislation of the statutory rules for the control of firearms. It stated that it was undesirable and that codification in this area was almost as pressing as it is, for example, in the area of sexual violence. Instead the Bill proposes to make further extensive amendments to our firearms control laws and will exacerbate the piecemeal and fragmented nature of this important area of the law.

Fragmented laws and untracked amendments can result in errors on the part of both the prosecution authorities and defence lawyers and the subsequent misapplication of the law by the courts. This is apparent from a decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal given on 24 March where the court declined to follow a previous decision that was based on the interpretation of a statutory provision that had been effectively repealed and replaced at the time the decision was pronounced. The Minister ought to be bringing before the House today proposals for the necessary reform of the Firearms Acts into a single, comprehensive, updated and consolidated code.

Sometimes I am amazed that practitioners of the law in various parts of the country who have to rely on the Law Society Gazette are able to stay abreast of developments given the ad hoc manner in which amendments were made over the years. We are adding to that problem with this Bill.

I am sure the Minister genuinely wants to control firearms but his subliminal message about those who raise questions regarding his approach to the matter is that they are not on the side of the angels. I share the Minister's objective of putting crime bosses and gangs out of business, but no matter how hard I look, I cannot find evidence that thugs and gangsters are sourcing weapons from law abiding citizens with licences to hold handguns. Certainly, firearms are stolen from members of the farming community because the use of shotguns is unsurprising in rural Ireland and they are not generally protected in the same fashion as weapons held by gun clubs. From my observation, such thefts are a fairly minor occurrence. It appears more common that crime bosses purchase guns from the same sources outside the country who supply them with drugs. We should not give the impression that we are dealing with that scourge.

As has been noted previously, the present gun control regime is much more rigorous than was the case prior to 1972 because of the decisions which had to be made on foot of circumstances in Northern Ireland. If the Minister is prepared to accept amendments preventing legitimate handgun holders from being put out of business, this Bill will be welcome in terms of further tightening these controls.

I concur with Deputy Charles Flanagan regarding knife crime. I am not sure if he mentioned the 16 responses on Twitter. The Minister for Defence, Deputy O'Dea, receives more responses to his articles in the Sunday Independent. Perhaps he should be diverted from his other duties in order to write articles on this subject in that newspaper because he could thereby reach a larger audience than the cyberspace initiatives of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform.

The Minister spoke about extensive consultation and claimed that nobody will be surprised by the content of the Bill. I was informed that the consultative panel was not shown what some of its members regard as controversial proposals. Again, therefore, his claims of extensive consultation diverges by 180° with the views of people who believe they should have been consulted on and allowed reasonable time for responding to measures to which they take exception.

He adduced in support of his argument the remarks made by Mr. Justice Charlton. However, one can find other judges who take differing views. I tend to agree with the Minister that we ought not to mistake this for an accretion of rights by the persons concerned but, nonetheless, judges differ when responsible people resort to the courts in this matter. It is not surprising that a member of the Bench would remark that ordinary people are alarmed by the difficulties we face in regard to gun crime. Violent incidents occur almost every weekend and the contention between bosses for supremacy and the profits flowing from the drugs trade is often settled by guns. I have yet to be shown a jurisdiction in which the clamping down on legitimate licensed firearms holders diminishes the flow of guns to criminal gangs. That is the only point I am raising with the Minister and if he can provide evidence of such a connection or that the Bill will help to address the issue, I will accept his proposals.

It is important that the Minister confirms he is not alleging the existence of a gun culture in this country. We certainly have a problem but this involves illegal guns. That is a horse of an entirely different colour and any measures the Minister can devise to clamp down on those who possess illegal weapons will have the full support of the Labour Party. Even his own figures are not sufficient evidence to support the contention that stolen licensed handguns are being used in the terrible crimes being committed in many parts of urban Ireland.

I welcome the opportunity to address the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2009 and the provisions which the Minister and his Department are bringing before the House on an ongoing basis to deal with the cultural and historical issues in our society which affect the lives of many people. While some in this House dispute the effectiveness of this legislation in regard to crime, there is little doubt it will impact on the culture of gun crime. Supply is a separate issue and Deputy Rabbitte has reminded us that the procurement of short arms is part of the illicit trade in drugs. Coming as I do from County Clare, Limerick city is in close proximity to much of my constituency. I do not want to single out that city because other cities suffer similar problems involving violent crime.

The general availability of firearms has upped the ante in the way these thugs, criminals and scumbags are treating their own lives, the lives of their families and the community at large. It is incumbent on all of us, as legislators, to find solutions. This is not only about banning the use of certain firearms and seizing illegally held firearms. It is about trying to change that culture. The legislation helps towards developing a different culture in society by demonstrating to the next generation that the use of guns will not be tolerated.

I have great sympathy for many of the people to whom Deputy Rabbitte referred. They are law abiding citizens who are involved in a sport, in which they clearly participate in a safe and practical way. I met a number of those involved and I visited one of their firing ranges. It operates to a high standard and they can be trusted. The concern in some quarters is that when we become successful in removing the illegal firearms that are in circulation and become better at ensuring we prevent small arms entering the State, criminals will begin to focus on legally held firearms. Several gun dealers have been the subject of successful break-ins and this issue needs to be examined relatively closely to ensure that, as we improve in the detection and removal of illegal firearms from society, legally held firearms are not accessible by criminals.

It is vital that we change this culture. Depending on where we come from or on our experience, we can all acknowledge the ravages of gun crime, which builds on the illicit trade in drugs. There would not be the same proliferation of illegal handguns if we did not have the scourge of the illicit drugs trade. Unfortunately, the younger generation of drug dealers and drug traffickers have little regard for life to the extent that over relatively small issues such as a debt or a perceived insult, they are prepared themselves or through their associates to dispense with human life. It is outrageous that this has been allowed to happen and that it was not tackled much earlier through the education system so that this culture would be changed.

While the legislation may not resolve any issue overnight, it will feed into the development of a culture in which society will have a much different attitude to the use of guns for sport and recreation. In some cases, people possess weapons to reflect their desire to own and have access to a firearm, which is licensed. We need to examine further legislation to facilitate those who are committed to sport, who are law abiding in all respects and who have ideas about safeguards, although it is not possible to do so in this Bill. Discussion is needed with the various groups affected to examine ways in which the sport can continue and new people can enter the sport in a way that does not alter the Government's efforts to bring about a change in culture.

The publicity surrounding the Bill is welcome in heightening awareness about issues relating to violent gun crime. Anything that keeps this issue to the fore is necessary and welcome and we need to make our best effort to continue to highlight the issue in the House. I am also cognisant that the Bill does not only deal with the prohibition and licensing of weapons but also the Schengen system of information exchange between European authorities. While we are not as familiar with the more obvious benefits of the Schengen regime because the State and Britain opted out of the element of the agreement dealing with the common travel area, it is important that there be good co-operation between police forces, particularly in the transfer of information.

It is welcome that the Government is building on that agreement through this legislation because much of our gun crime relates to the international drugs trade. The media regularly report on leading Irish criminal actors who have found refuge in southern Europe and it is important the State continues its efforts to ensure that the correct amount of information is transferred between the various authorities and, where possible, that these individuals are pursued, regardless of where they reside in European, and the full rigours of the law are applied to them. It makes a mockery of our judicial system and the rule of law when criminal elements can bask in the sun at the southern tip of Europe. While I recognise there is co-operation at all levels within Europe, it is disappointing for everybody that these people can evade the law in this jurisdiction and continue to bask in the glory of their ill gotten gains while peddling their trade in a sunny climate. It is necessary for all legislators to ensure we work towards eliminating that element of the criminal fraternity. We must continue to build on the experience and difficulties associated with extradition and European arrest warrants. I hope the House can ensure such grotesque displays of arrogance and evasion of the law are brought to an end as quickly as possible.

Like Deputy Rabbitte, I acknowledge the work of the Bills Office in preparing the supporting documentation for this legislation. It was compiled quickly and it is extremely comprehensive. Good information on the background to various different laws referenced in the Bill, some of which will be amended, is outlined.

I refer to the powers of the Criminal Assets Bureau, which are not addressed directly in the legislation. While the bureau's officials have been successful in targeting various criminal elements who have made considerable sums of money and continue to display it in a particularly arrogant way, it is important they are given whatever additional powers are needed. The perception is that the CAB has gone away but it has been working extremely diligently and effectively. The bureau is no longer as relevant to the media because there is only so many times a house, boat or car can be seized and it does not receive the same level of publicity it received in the early stages, but we must recognise the work done by its officials. It is apparent to me that certain criminal elements are purchasing land in rural areas and moving out of the city to develop what would be their summer residences. They succeed in getting planning permission and thus bring their criminal activities to rural areas. There may be a role for the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government in developing some sort of scheme in our planning laws or guidelines that would — in certain circumstances, depending on the views of the local authority — require Garda clearance to allow certain individuals to proceed with the planning application. It may be cumbersome to do so, but it is certainly worth looking at. In many rural areas, gardaí are frustrated that some criminal elements can come to establish significant bases where it is much more difficult for law enforcers to continue surveillance and keep a general eye on them. It is a particular problem in the county I represent because of our proximity to where a number of these gangs are based.

I am happy to see that the Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Michael Finneran, is in the House, as this is something relevant on which he may want to work with the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. Hopefully, it would help to block at every possible opportunity the ability of these people to relocate. They have developed their ill-gotten gains from the drugs trade, so they should be prevented in every possible respect from continuing their efforts.

I recognise the work of the Minister and his Department in attempting to keep to the fore these difficult issues in society, as well as developing a more favourable culture devoid of the need to have guns in circulation. While we may never get to a point where we come to grips totally with the criminal fraternity who peddle drugs and guns, at least we could get on top of it. Clearly, however, we have not reached that stage yet. Last week we saw what happened in Lucan and the great work the gardaí did in that encounter. It shows the kind of risks involved and the significant threat to gardaí who do such a wonderful job in protecting society. Great credit is due to them. Obviously there are people who are prepared, even when confronted by armed gardaí, to open fire rather than be subjected to the rigours of the law. There is an ongoing battle there which we need to deal with. The gardaí need our efforts and the assistance of this House in providing not just the necessary legislative framework but also particular legislative elements. These will allow them to counteract this threat to the State not just for the current generation but also to develop a society that is more in tune with what we want. It will also ensure that this element is removed for good by an emerging culture that will not tolerate what has gone on heretofore.

This Bill makes several amendments to the operation of the system of information exchange between European authorities, alters the law relating to European arrest warrants and makes significant changes to firearms licensing regulations. These matters have been outlined by previous speakers also.

It is almost inevitable that the focus of discussion will be directed towards the issue of handguns. This is a topic that has caused widespread outrage, both from those who rightly condemn the illegal and often fatal use of such weapons and from those who view the issue from another perspective, such as sport and the perceived right to own a gun.

Best estimates indicate that there are approximately 20 licensed firearms per 1,000 people in the Republic. New Zealand, which has a similar population to ours, has approximately 760,000 legally held rifles and shotguns. Approximately 4% of households in the United Kingdom possess some form of legal firearm with a national legally held armoury of long guns of approximately 4 million weapons. Before the legislation passed in the aftermath of Dunblane in 1996, there were approximately 200,000 licensed handguns in the United Kingdom.

We must also consider the overall picture concerning illegal weapons held in Ireland. These are split into two categories: grey and black guns. Grey guns are those not held in compliance with firearms regulations. This may be due to ignorance of legal obligations or an attempt to save licensing costs. These weapons are frequently in poor condition and are rarely used. Some of them are antiquated and people hang them on their walls as ornaments. A substantial armoury of bolt-action weapons dating from before the Second World War is thought to make up the bulk of these weapons. While they are held illegally, they are not generally suitable for criminal activity.

Of far more significance is the number of black firearms. These are imported weapons expressly for use for criminal purposes. There are no reliable estimates of the number of black firearms in Ireland, but they are known to be considerable. The Minister has not provided any estimate of the number of such weapons held here and I do not believe he knows how many there are.

To date, legislation on the control of firearms here has been piecemeal. The steady rise in the licensing of weapons for personal use is indicative that immediate corrective action must be taken. Approximately 1,800 pistol licenses were granted last year, with a worrying inconsistency in the numbers granted from district to district. Garda superintendents have been operating in isolation without universal guidelines to direct their decisions. This Bill will enable a more rigorous system to be put in place from August this year. I am disappointed, however, that it took the remarks made in the High Court last July to force the Minister to carry out what he termed an urgent and intensive review of firearms legislation.

Fine Gael has been calling for a long time for the Government to address this problem. Over the past 20 years, our spokespersons are on record as having called for such legislation. Across America and Europe, we have seen the horror of random shootings of innocent people — the victims of perpetrators of unsound mind.

The new guidelines will allow Garda superintendents to inquire into the medical history of applicants and seek character references. Such provisions are very important. This, allied with certain minimum standards for the storage of firearms, will provide a framework for the safer issuing of firearms licences. Such measures are of the utmost importance to us all. Communities are scared of those who hold firearms and, from time to time, we hear dreadful stories after tragic events.

Unless firearms are controlled, we could see a situation here akin to that in the United States where the right to own a gun has, in many states, outweighed the risk to life posed by an unregulated gun sector. There may be a historic precedent in the US for such gun ownership. However, unless we take appropriate measures here in the short-term, we could lose control of what is already, essentially, an ad hoc approach to gun regulation. One of the most disturbing aspects of the Bill is the fact that the Minister is focusing to a marked degree on legally held firearms, with the result that the spotlight is being removed from the issue of illegal firearms. The Minister does not need me to remind him that criminality and gangland crime are rampant but apparently what he does need is strong urging from this side of the House to tackle the problem head on.

Fine Gael is the party of law and order and since the foundation of the State our policy has been to deal with criminals. We do not want people victimised and imprisoned in their own homes as we have witnessed. I was canvassing with people in my area last week and at 9 p.m. I had to wait almost 15 minutes for an elderly lady to take down barricades of stools and tables from the door of her house before she could open it when she heard who was there. This is not a proper way for our elderly citizens to live.

There seems to be a lack of consistency in the Minister's approach to this serious matter, which I want to see addressed. The Minister promises tough measures to tackle crime but his proposal to review legislation on the licensing of guns on an annual basis does not even feature in the Bill. A total of 12,000 new firearms licences were issued between 2007 and 2008, bringing the total number in the State to 233,000. The previous figure of 221,000 remained static between 2004 and 2006 but with regard to the increased number issued from 2007 to 2008 there was a resultant 500% increase in the number of pistol and handgun licences issued since 2003, with an increase in the number of rifle licences of 20%.

I would like to see the legislation containing greater provision for the use of handguns by sporting clubs. Surely, it would have made sense for the granting of licences in such cases to be directed at sporting organisations rather than individuals. Strict guidelines enforced on clubs for the custody of such firearms, on which continued operation of the sporting facilities would depend, would be easier to enforce than strictures on individuals. Handgun shooting is an internationally recognised sport. At a time when the Government is withdrawing capital funding from clubs and sporting organisations across many disciplines, it is imperative that unnecessary restrictions do not hamper Ireland's participation in world class events. A Longford man, Derek Burnett, whom we all know very well, represented Ireland at the Beijing Olympics. This was a source of great pride to the people of County Longford and to the country.

With gangland crime spiralling out of control and rural crime rates rising, the Minister's attention needs to be focused on illegally held guns. To date, one of his more dubious solutions to tackling gangland crime has been to rob Peter to pay Paul by taking a much needed Garda presence out of rural communities and transferring it to urban areas. The recruitment of the promised extra gardaí would have eliminated the need for such counter-productive juggling.

Removing a Garda presence from rural communities, such as my area of Longford-Westmeath, opens the door to urban criminals who are being given an invitation to crime as the Government exports the problem of criminal activity form cities to rural communities. I am glad a rural Minister of State, Deputy Finneran, is sitting across from me. He knows the effect this is having on the midlands as he is from Roscommon. He knows first-hand the problems rural people encounter on a daily basis with regard to criminal activity and criminals coming from Dublin and attacking them in their homes and communities. I have seen this first-hand in my area of Longford-Westmeath where local people are being threatened and terrorised by gangs driving from Dublin.

Last week in my parish, an old age pensioner was forced to hand over €200 at knife point to a criminal. He was terrorised and could do nothing else but hand over what he had in the house to the criminal. This is not right in any society. Three weeks ago, my next-door neighbour came down the stairs of her home to be confronted by criminals in the living room. It took some persuasion to get them out of the house on that evening. She was a very brave woman to confront them and compliments must go to her. This is why we need a strong Garda presence in rural areas.

Fighting urban gangland crime by withdrawing an essential Garda presence in rural areas is extremely short-sighted and of deep concern to those in the midlands and the entire country. The proposed closure of the valuable one-man Garda stations in Castletowngeoghegan, Ballinahown, Ballymore, Glasson, Multyfarnham, Rathowen and Aughnacliff in County Westmeath and many areas in County Longford, which are already under-manned, will lead to increased violence, crime and vandalism. The biggest mistake ever made by a Government was to close the small rural Garda stations. When I attended primary school I knew who was the garda serving my area; today nobody has a clue who serves a particular area. The gardaí used to be in constant consultation with the community and had a great insight into what was happening in the area. There was far less crime then than there is today.

In a time of increasing crime, which as we all know is escalating in proportion to the recession, it is imperative that the Minister does not cut essential Garda numbers in places which already have a skeleton staff. Centralising Garda personnel may be seen as a cost-cutting measure for a shamefully undermanned cash-strapped force to cope with gangland activities. In some parts of the country criminals are better equipped than the Garda Síochána and I am sorry to have to say this but it is a fact. However, the cost will be borne by counties such as Longford and Westmeath, where remote areas will see the closure of single officer stations and the increased breakdown of law and order combined with a lack of security for residents. I pointed out a few instances of this in my patch of County Longford and it is widespread throughout our country.

While the Bill will increase the penalty in the existing Firearms and Offensive Weapons Act 1990, the law needs considerable strengthening. In November last year, Fine Gael published the Criminal Justice (Violent Crime Prevention) Bill to clear up areas relating to sentencing, automatic remission and penalties for possession of firearms and blades. Specific proposals on firearms included the mandatory reporting of the loss or theft of any firearm or ammunition, with penalties for failure to comply extending to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or a fine, and on conviction on indictment to imprisonment of a term not exceeding five years or a fine or both; and possession of a firearm to carry a penalty on conviction on indictment of a fine not exceeding €50,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years or both. The Private Members' Bill in which these proposals were put forward by Fine Gael was rejected by the Government. I hope it will take on board some of the proposals in our Criminal Justice (Violent Crime Prevention) Bill, which came before the House last year.

While this Bill increases the penalties for knife crime, the problem is enforcement. The number of offences of possession of a knife rose dramatically in the past five years, with a 72% increase in offences relating to the possession of offensive weapons, mainly knives. Of these, only 32% resulted in convictions. This is a very low conviction rate and it must be addressed. It is another reason that additional Garda manpower is needed throughout the country and particularly in rural areas. I understand that the number of Garda recruits in Templemore at present is smaller than it has been in two decades. This is an indictment of a Government that promised zero tolerance when Deputy Bertie Ahern took office as Taoiseach. Why is this? Given the alarming escalation in the number of stabbings and associated fatalities in the UK, the Government should be putting in place every possible preventative measure to ensure that copycat crimes of this nature do not become a feature of urban youth gangs. The appalling and senseless loss of life among young people, many still in school, that has become such a regular occurrence in the UK should shock the Government into the strongest action possible. However, the annual conviction rate in this country has remained static at 36% to 38%. How can this be changed?

I do not believe the way to tackle knife crime lies in targeting the social networking websites. My colleague, Deputy Charles Flanagan, dealt with this earlier. Utilising sites such as Bebo and Facebook is a wasted gesture aimed at getting cheap publicity. The Minister is fond of smiling and laughing; he appeared to be in good humour when he was in the Chamber earlier. He should re-examine this approach. He is also fond of the limelight and probably read the article about him in this month's issue of Phoenix magazine. However, only the most naïve would believe that users of these network sites would access them to receive a message from the Government or its Ministers.

This is a serious issue that requires serious and well formulated, decisive action — without spin. There has been far too much spin on the part of this Government over the years, and much of it has got us into the current mess. However, I am delighted the Minister has decided finally to outlaw samurai swords. They are dangerous and a dreadful threat to life. I support the Bill. It was listed as one of the five priority Bills last summer so it is not before time that it has come before the House.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Bill. Every effort must be made to tighten up the criminal justice system and tip the scales in favour of the law abiding citizen, who is increasingly fearful of walking down a main street in Ireland at present for fear of being caught in the crossfire between rival gangs or as an innocent bystander at the occurrence of a criminal activity. This is an exaggeration in the case of some towns, but for many larger centres of population it is too much of a reality to ignore. If there are ways of putting pressure on criminals, I believe we must seize them with willing hands.

In welcoming this measure, I wish to focus on the provisions in the Bill regarding European arrest warrants and the official approval for the possession of firearms. The introduction of European arrest warrants is a typical example of the success of the European ideal, in that it has almost eliminated the necessity for extradition treaties or proceedings between countries in Europe. This is a much easier way of dealing with criminals, who are now more mobile than ever. If we still had to go through complicated extradition proceedings, it is possible that some European countries could become a safe haven for criminals from other jurisdictions, including Ireland. Anything that is done to simplify the movement of criminals between European countries which have just legal systems is to be welcomed. Traditionally, it took up to nine months to have a person extradited from another country. This has now been reduced to just six weeks.

There is also the simple yet hallowed principle that "justice delayed is justice denied". If the accused is found innocent, the speedier the passage to that conclusion, the better. Likewise, when dealing with a person who is eventually convicted of a crime, the sooner he or she is taken out of circulation, the better. Extradition has always been complicated and time consuming, as well as being a slow and expensive procedure, and if the provisions of section 7 speed up and streamline the process of moving a person accused of serious crime from one European jurisdiction to another, I support it.

I am glad that section 8 recognises the logic of using modern technology to transmit necessary information from one jurisdiction to another. I applaud the Minister for trying to break through the barrier of tradition, which looks suspiciously at any attempt to modernise the system. I am all too conscious that the justice system, with its power over liberty and legal rights, should not endanger those in any way, but it should be possible for computer and technology experts to be able to build in adequate safeguards to operate the system. In the current climate, every effort should be made to cut costs where safely possible and without encroaching unnecessarily on people's rights and liberty.

An important element of the procedure is that member states can no longer frustrate the extradition of their citizens to another member state. As the European elections draw near, euro-sceptics are again raising this issue. I wonder if Declan Ganley and Libertas fall into that category, as they take a less than enthusiastic view of the current situation. Many provisions of this Bill are technical but they constitute a genuine and honest effort to make the system flow more freely.

I also welcome the provision in section 10 of the power for a garda to arrest without warrant a person he believes to be part of a Schengen information system, SIS, alert. This was provided for under the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003, but is dealt with in far more detail in this Bill. It makes adequate provision for the accused and arrested person to have their case heard with all due speed. Section 45 authorises gardaí to photograph and fingerprint persons arrested under the original Act, to enable them to verify a person's identity. Until now, gardaí had no power to do this. However, we must be realistic about the nature of the time in which we live, the violent nature of criminals, even in Ireland, and the fact that cheap flights allow criminals to flit around Europe with relative ease. I am aware that the concept of photographing and fingerprinting suspects raises the hackles of the civil rights lobby but even with the introduction of the particularly demanding US identification procedures, there has not been a rash of complaints about the system. We must be cognisant of what is happening elsewhere in the world as well as having regard to the conditions in Ireland.

In recent days, there was further evidence of the expansion of violent crime in this country. Last week, gardaí confronted armed raiders who were in the process of committing a crime. A shotgun was being held to the head of a security guard and it was obvious that his life was in danger. To think otherwise is to exclude oneself from the real world. Luckily, gardaí were on the alert and on the scene in a very short time. As a result of the obvious threat to the welfare if not the life of the captive, and after what appears to have been adequate and proper warning on the part of the gardaí, the raiders were fired on. As a result, one person died and another was wounded. The Garda Ombudsman Commission is investigating and has yet to report. In the absence of shrill condemnation of Garda violence, we can accept that there was legitimate threat to innocent life and liberty. I regret, as does anyone with any sensitivity and feeling, the loss of life in this case. However, we must have regard for the particular circumstances and the type of reckless adventure in which the raiders were engaged. I commend the gardaí involved on their vigilance and courage and hope they do not suffer any psychological problems as a result of their legitimate actions. I reiterate that I regret the loss of life in this case. However, we must have equal regard to the seriousness of the situation that presented to the gardaí.

Given the widespread disregard for the rights of people to walk the streets, carry on commerce and live a normal life, such an event was waiting to happen. I hope lessons can be learned from the incident and that those planning a similar adventure may think again. The Garda has set down a marker in showing it is on top of the criminal threat, that its intelligence is reliable and that it can respond quickly and efficiently. In particular, its effectiveness in bringing large numbers of serious criminals to justice in Limerick is to be commended. However, when one gang member is taken off the streets, there is invariably another to take his place. With the help of the provisions in the Criminal Justice (Surveillance) Bill 2009, I am confident the success rate in the prevention and solving of crimes will rise dramatically. In addition, we have the Schengen information system, SIS, a provision which attempts to tip the balance back in favour of law and order and away from the criminal fraternity. It offers a course that is very favourable to this country and which puts further pressure on those involved in criminal activity.

Part 4 deals with the licensing of firearms. I am in favour of limiting the spread of firearms where possible, without unduly impinging on the right of reasonable people to operate within the framework of legitimate hunting and gun clubs, using weapons approved by the Garda. We have an unhappy history with firearms in this State. Far too often, they have been used in anger against law-abiding people and members of the Garda, with serious or fatal consequences. The greater the number of firearms, the greater the possibility of injury or death either as a consequence of an accident or through their deliberate use.

I have no desire to be a killjoy or to take away any legitimate right to own and use a firearm, whether for the containment of vermin, for example, or for legitimate and controlled leisure activities. In the late 1960s, all handguns and high-calibre rifles were confiscated by the State and taken into secure storage until such time as the political and security climate would allow for their general use. That point was reached some years ago but since then, there has been a staggering proliferation in the ownership of handguns. Some of this is accounted for by those persons whose weapons were previously confiscated returning those weapons to usage in order to resume their former pastimes. However, from a situation in 2003 where there was only one legally held weapon of this type, the number has now mushroomed to some 1,800, according to the most recently published data. As I said, the more guns there are in circulation, the greater the possibility of their being used illegally.

I recently saw a report on the evening news about a man in north Leinster who entered a school armed with a knife in search of a boy with whom he had some history of conflict. Upon his conviction, the sentencing judge commented that we are lucky in this State that we have not had a more serious incident involving guns in schools. The judge observed that in other jurisdictions, the law has been too liberal in this regard and that we have enough problems in this State without replicating the most dangerous aspects of life in other countries by facilitating through our laws the proliferation of firearms. The problem is that the law as it stands is open to varying interpretations and is applied with varying degrees of flexibility in different parts of the State. For instance, Wexford is seen as a liberal county in regard to firearms licensing. District officers in various parts of the State may have a different emphasis, resulting in disparity between regimes in these districts.

At a recent appearance before the Committee of Public Accounts, the Garda Commissioner, Mr. Fachtna Murphy, argued that he could not offer guidelines to his superintendents in this area because individual courts were overruling the recommendations of the Garda not to provide licences for handguns. Gardaí find themselves having to issue licences for Glock handguns, the type frequently used in murders in this State, at a time when criminals are using them to further their own ends. This is unacceptable. We must have definitive guidelines for the issue of firearms, particularly handguns. As the judge remarked in the case to which I referred, we are fortunate that there has not as yet been a serious shooting incident in a school. However, European and American norms are arriving here in every other strand of life. I hope that in making guns so freely available, we are not facilitating another Columbine or Hungerford.

According to the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, 53,000 rifles and 77,000 shotguns are licensed in the State. Taken in conjunction with the unusually large number of handguns, this works out at one weapon for every 17 people. It is little wonder we are seeing an increase in murders involving firearms. Some gun owners are far too careless with their weapons. The Garda has warned that criminals are targeting households with gun dogs in the fairly certain knowledge that weapons are held in those homes. We are all aware that members of legitimate gun clubs want to use their firearms for purely recreational purposes. In principle, I have no difficulty with that. However, with a gun comes a great responsibility. The Garda is well placed to establish whether people are willing to discharge their responsibilities, whether they will be careful users of the weapon, protecting it and storing it properly, or whether they might have criminal intent.

I have had representations from members of clubs who are training for the Olympic Games and are genuinely afraid that their activities will be curtailed. I ask the Minister to take this concern into account in this legislation. For example, I received a letter today from a person in Dublin on this matter. The correspondent explained that he has participated in shooting sports since 1990, representing his country internationally on many occasions, most recently at the world handgun championships in Indonesia in 2008. There are many people representing Ireland in such disciplines. When it comes to winning gold medals in Olympic Games or other competitions, there are few disciplines where we have the opportunity to compete at the same level as athletes in other countries. However, the various shooting disciplines offer such an opportunity. These are sports we should encourage rather than discourage. I am confident the legislation could be tweaked to allow superintendents to issue licences to such persons on condition that they have adequate secure storage for the firearms and that their homes are fitted with alarms. If such regulations were in place, any concerns in this regard would be allayed. These people only want to use their firearms for legitimate purposes. While I support the Bill, I am strongly of the view that there should be a concession for those who use handguns solely for the purpose of competition. The numbers involved are small but we must not curtail their activity.

I am pleased that the popular paint ball centres, stage props and starting guns will be permitted on licence from a superintendent under the imitation firearms prohibitions. It has been suggested that legally held firearms for hunting and other recreational purposes should be stored in a Garda station and only taken out and returned at weekends. This would not be practical due to constraints on Garda time, particularly in rural Garda stations. I cannot envisage a procession of hunters into a Garda station on Friday evenings and again on Monday mornings to withdraw and deposit their legally held weapons. That would expose owners to even more risk, identifying them to potential thieves as gun owners. The new restrictions on holding firearms are sad but necessary. After the Northern Troubles had been resolved, we believed we could resume normal life and guns could be used for sport and recreation. The criminal threat has made this impossible. We see the parallel between the paramilitary threat of previous decades and the present threat from criminal gangs. Unfortunately, just as special provisions were necessary for the control of political violence in the past, so too they are required to control the current criminal threat.

Section 42 amends the Criminal Justice Act 1984 to allow for staff of the Garda technical bureau to certify that material which is being referred to in court is the result of work carried out by the Garda technical bureau and is sufficient evidence of the facts stated, thereby obviating the need for Garda technical bureau staff to give oral evidence in court of such matters in every circumstance. Will the Minister clarify whether this provision refers to evidence which, in the normal course of events, would not give rise to a requirement for cross-examination on the basis that the person who has given the evidence is making statements of fact only? If that is the case, I fully support the provision as it will ensure that valuable Garda time is not wasted by requiring gardaí to wait for God knows how long before being able to make statements of fact in court. In such circumstances, the time of Garda witnesses would be better utilised by deploying them on the streets fighting crime and acting as a source of comfort to citizens. This is also true of other gardaí who spend hours hanging around courtrooms waiting to give evidence in cases involving the most minor of offences. There must be better ways of dealing with Garda evidence in court. I ask the Minister to clarify the position regarding section 42.

Notwithstanding the reservations I have expressed regarding the provisions on firearms used for recreational purposes, for example, in gun clubs, I am pleased with the contents of the Bill. I wholeheartedly support the legislation and commend the Minister on introducing it.

Ar dtús, gabhaim buíochas leis na hoifigí sa rannóg a thug comhairle dúinn ar cad atá sa Bhille atá os ár gcomhair inniu. Déanfaidh mé ar dtús déileáil leis an chuid den Bhille a bhaineann leis an European arrest warrant, na leasuithe atá molta sa Bhille seo.

Several years ago, Sinn Féin called a division when the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003, which was introduced to implement an EU framework decision was rushed through the House at short notice after a mere hour of ill-informed debate, from which my party was excluded. Criminals actively make use of borders to avoid prosecution and punishment. While we must work together in Europe and beyond to ensure criminals are brought to justice, there is a right and a wrong way to achieve this objective. The European arrest warrant is the latter.

During the discussion on the legislation implementing the framework decision, the Irish Human Rights Commission concluded that the framework decision was based on a flawed presumption of effective and equivalent protections of accused persons' rights between European Union member states. It also stated that the 2003 Act was likely to diminish constitutional protections in the area of extradition. The then Minister, in his wisdom, ignored the principal conclusions and recommendations of the commission and decided, so to speak, not to give it the time of day.

Given the Irish Human Rights Commission's role in this State, specifically its function in exercising oversight of legislation that is likely to impinge on the human rights of citizens, why was the Bill before us not submitted to the commission for its observations? While this legislation may be practical and logical in the Minister's eyes, given its implications, whether good or bad, it should be referred to the human rights commission to allow it to be examined from a different perspective and to ensure it does not further erode the human rights foundations of society. The decision not to submit the Bill to the commission is a disgraceful example of the Minister's bad attitude to a body established under the Good Friday Agreement and charged with promoting the fundamental human rights of all in this State. It also follows his decision to slash funding for the Irish Human Rights Commission in the 2009 budget.

I appeal to the Minister, even at this late stage, to refer the Bill to the Irish Human Rights Commission for its consideration. This step should have been taken when the heads of the Bill were agreed. The commission may find that the legislation is in order, although I doubt that will be the outcome of its deliberations, especially with regard to the European arrest warrant system. That the House is again addressing this system so soon after the enactment of the European Arrest Warrant Act was introduced suggests that either the House or the European Union did not get the legislation right in the first instance. The Act was rushed and it has since become clear that practical matters which have made the European arrest warrant either unworkable or subject to major court challenges need to be addressed.

Sinn Féin and the Irish Human Rights Commission were not alone in voicing criticism of the European arrest warrant system. It has also been heavily criticised by international human rights organisations, including Human Rights Watch, which specifically cited the lack of fair trial guarantees in the European arrest warrant proposal as possibly violating human rights norms. Certain rights are unacceptably negated by the arrest warrant system and I am not convinced the safeguards introduced in the 2003 Act were adequate.

My party's concerns about the European arrest warrant include: the abolition of the dual criminality requirement for a list of 32 crimes in the absence of harmonised laws relating to a number of these offences; the inclusion of the term "terrorism" on the positive list in the context of an excessively broad European Union common definition; the removal of the traditional categoric exemptions from extradition, including political offences; the limits on the so-called specialty rule; and the fact that the appeal process is unclear. The Bill before us exacerbates these shortcomings.

My party is strongly opposed to this section of the Bill. It is a pity that I might find myself opposing this Bill, which is three Bills in one, albeit three separate parts, at the conclusion of Second Stage because I do not believe in this section. I will return to the section to do with firearms.

I oppose the Bill and I oppose the agenda which is akin to an EU federalist agenda. The Government should not have backed the framework decision in the first place. The 2003 Act was rammed through all Stages at break-neck speed and with little room for manoeuvre for this Parliament that such a significant development in our justice system should have undergone. There should have been proper scrutiny. There also should have been a proper chance to amend it to ensure that it could be implemented practically and that it could guarantee the rights of the accused persons or the rights to fair trial procedures, and guarantee that human rights would not be abused.

The 2003 Act and this amending legislation is irredeemably flawed and, therefore, unsupportable. The introduction of the EU arrest warrant moved us from a formal extradition relationship between sovereign Governments in a EU context to a new inter-court system analogous to the interaction between a federation of states. My party believes the EU arrest warrant contributes to the development of a super-state architecture, a federal state system as opposed to the partnership approach taken up to now where countries signed up to bilateral agreements between the sovereign Governments recognising the different peculiarities on a one-by-one basis of different criminal systems that have grown up in each nation state in Europe.

I object in principle to the federal super-state structure. My party is not alone in that objection. In fact, the most recent referendum would indicate that the majority of the population shares our opposition to the creation of that super-state structure.

I will point out some of my concerns about particular provisions of Part 2. Sections 11 and 13 limit the avenues for appeal and extend the duration for which a person can be detained where a surrender is not effected within the specified timeframes. In addition, the Bill removes the existing provision for withdrawal of consent to surrender. These all constitute regressive steps.

A host of sections simply modernises the recognised means of inter-state communication beyond fax to include mechanisms such as e-mail. That, in itself, is welcome. It is a modernisation and there are many other sections of the law that should be modernised in the same way. However, section 10 provides that an alert on the Schengen information system will be the equivalent to an EU arrest warrant. That might be fine but, given the Schengen information system and the equivalence of the alert, it will give a garda an automatic power of arrest without warrant and then the High Court can remand the person in custody for 14 days prior to the production of the EU arrest warrant to which the alert relates, if a warrant exists at all.

Given that we are recognising new technology in the first part by stating that an alert would be equivalent to an EU arrest warrant and that the inter-state communication can move beyond fax, I cannot see the circumstances arising where we would have to wait 14 days for the production of an arrest warrant, which could be e-mailed within seconds if required. Obviously, with weekends and public holidays taken into account, and perhaps time to find a judge, there might be a need to allow for a day or two, but the Bill allows for holding somebody in custody for 14 days until the production of a warrant, which should be available in the first instances before any alert appears on the Schengen information system. If it appears there, then it should be attached to the alert so that it can be downloaded by the Garda or an officer in another country. This would mean that the warrant is available and can be executed, and then that the person can apply for legal aid or whatever to prevent his or her extradition or the full implementation of the arrest warrant.

The scope for error under the Schengen information system has significant implications for this. People do not understand the seriousness of this information system. One should not forget that the scope for error of which we speak is that somebody could be deprived of his or her liberty for up to 14 days. When the Schengen information system was operating across just 13 countries there were 125,000 input or access points for the different security or police apparatus in those 13 states. If, as is intended, the principle of convergence, that is, the automated access to all data stored without oversight/authorisation requirements, is extended across the 27 member states some of which are very large, and potentially across the new common security area with the United States in the future, which has also been madly proposed by some, the number of access points will be much greater. If there were 125,000 input or access points for 13 states and this doubled that number, there would be a quarter of a million. With a quarter of a million such points, one can see the scale and the opportunities for mistakes to be made. We need to ensure that there are rigorous protections and mechanisms put in place to prevent mistakes, and also that the duration of time for which somebody may lose his or her liberty is reduced to ensure that people who are innocent, or whose names have been tagged unbeknownst to them for no reason at all, do not end up in front of a court or losing 14 days of their lives. Obviously, the greater number of access points ensures that there is a greater chance that data will be lost, stolen or otherwise illegally accessed, and a greater chance that inaccurate alerts will be recorded on the system causing, under this Bill, wrongful arrest and even detention.

I will turn now to the other section of the Bill, a section which we dealt with not so long ago. Even with our considerable scrutiny of the 2006 legislation on firearms, we still did not manage to get it right. The previous legislation was given very little time and was rushed through, and we got it totally wrong. On this occasion the amendments being suggested are practical ones. They recognise some of the points raised on Committee and Report Stages and tidy up the practice that has since emerged.

The Minister opened his speech and contextualised his introduction of the firearms provisions by specifically stating that his determination is to ensure that a gun culture not be allowed to form in the State. I welcome the Bill's firearms provisions, but it is important not to overstate their significance. This section of the Bill is about prudent gun control, but it will regrettably not reduce gun crime. It will not tackle the dangerous gun culture that already exists in segments of society, a sub-culture, the growth of which is evidenced by the increased access to weapons by lower level criminals and the exposure of guns to teenagers as young as 12 and 13 years of age.

Speaking in the House last December on the fatal shooting of Aidan Kane in East Wall, I called for legislation to be introduced to tighten gun control laws. I had just learned from a response to a parliamentary question that I had tabled that 1,200 legally held firearms had fallen into the hands of criminals in the preceding five years. This shocking figure has no doubt grown since. It highlighted the need for legislation to tighten up the laws regarding the licensing of firearms. For this reason, I welcome the relevant provisions in the Bill. At the time, I asked how many of the legally held firearms had been used in the commission of crimes, but the information was not forthcoming. That there is no database to record each legally held weapon, ballistics reports and so on is a problem.

I also emphasised the need for security to be tightened up at our ports, as large numbers of firearms continue to enter the country alongside the vast quantities of illicit drugs entering the market that fuel gangland crime. The State has just one X-ray machine to detect illegal drugs and weapons entering the State through the ports in trucks and containers. The container scanner's location at any given time allows major drugs importers to decide on which port to use to smuggle their drugs or to at least hedge their bets and minimise the risk of seizure. I call on the Government to ensure that all major commercial ports with high volumes of haulier traffic have a permanent X-ray container scanner in place.

In my constituency in particular, a large number of weapons are in the hands of several drugs gangs, resulting in more than 13 deaths in one feud alone. Most of that weaponry seems to have entered the State with drugs shipments. I appeal to the Government to go beyond what is recommended in the Bill, but we will tease out some of the points on Committee Stage. I welcome this aspect of the Bill, but I cannot support the provisions on the European arrest warrant.

Is that agreed? Agreed.

I gladly support legislation that seeks to limit gun and knife crime, which can lead to appalling tragedies, sometimes with attacks on targeted victims, other times on randomly chosen ones. While most guns used in crimes are illegally obtained, a gun should only be legally obtainable in restricted circumstances for a clear and justified purpose instead of being permitted to any citizen in good standing who would like one. As the Minister implied, we do not want to see the "right to bear arms" culture that obtains in the United States of America, the needless opportunities created for high school shoot-outs, which have occurred in several countries but which we have so far been mercifully spared, and domestic tragedies, of which we have recently seen a few.

I appreciate that there are legitimate sporting uses in connection with country activities. I welcome the Minister's statement on consultation with the relevant bodies in this regard. A ban on handguns with limited exceptions will be reintroduced, that is, the possession of a handgun in all normal circumstances will be illegal. I note that this measure has the endorsement of the chief inspector, Ms Kathleen O'Toole.

Imitation firearms pose dangers. Their circumstances and verisimilitudes must be circumscribed, not least in the interests of anyone who might be tempted to use one. In certain circumstances, someone holding an imitation gun that others believe to be real might be in danger.

I welcome the reduction in knife deaths from 37 in 2007 to 15 in 2008. Three years ago, my daughter attended a going away party mainly involving employees of a well known US multinational in Dublin. While walking home, one party-goer intervened to stop a young man beating up a young woman. The intervention appeared to have succeeded, but the man ran into a house, fetched a knife and stabbed the mediator, who died of his wounds later that night. I witnessed a small part of the devastating and traumatic effect this had on family and friends. It not just destroys lives, but ruins the lives of those with whom they were close.

As the Minister pointed out, it is impossible to ban knives, but they should not be found or carried in public places. People high on drugs and alcohol, often aggressive, are not always fully responsible for their actions. However, it is a basic requirement in any civilised society that people be secure and free from attack regardless of age, gender, colour or creed. There should be no doubt about the serious consequences of causing or threatening serious bodily harm. Carrying weapons in a public place relates to this matter.

It is important that intimidation and harassment, sometimes accompanied by weapons, be tackled. Not too long ago, Tipperary town saw serious incidents, but I am glad to say that, after a certain interval, the law was applied with emphasis and will take its course. People must never get the impression that they are immune from the law.

Persons convicted under this legislation could end up in Thornton Hall. I applaud the Department's decision to break off negotiations where it seems that the other party was looking for too much. When I was a Senator and Mr. Michael McDowell was the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, I was critical of the high price being paid for farmland, even if for prison use. I am highly critical of the excessive reverence that has grown up in society for the rights of private property where it is required for the common good. No one should be allowed to make large fortunes in order to provide facilities. I am half-tempted to say God be with the days of land bonds under our Constitution or at least limited existing use compensation with perhaps a small added margin. Like the former Taoiseach, I am with the spirit of the Kenny report. Part of the reason we have suffered from a property bubble has been too much willingness on all our parts to pay inflated compensation for the acquisition of property, creating, in some cases, large windfall profits.

We need to learn lessons for the future and adopt stricter and more rigorous norms to protect tax-paying citizens. Like the president of SIPTU, Jack O'Connor, I would like to see us move, to the extent we have adopted them, from neo-liberal values to those of a social market economy.

I am glad this State is implementing more of the Schengen agreement. I am always surprised to hear a representative of Sinn Féin utter the catch-cry of Mrs. Thatcher in her Bruges speech about the phantom federal super-state. One would think Sinn Féin would be fairly unlikely disciples, but apparently not. I have always regretted that all-Ireland considerations and the free travel area have forced us to opt out of being full Schengen members, although arguably we have a mini-Schengen with the UK. I certainly favour maximum participation in Schengen to the extent compatible with that restraint.

In the era of cheap travel and modern communications, sunshine life and apartments on the Costa Del Sol and similar places, and equally, the use of Ireland as a quiet place to shelter some of those wanted in other jurisdictions, the streamlining of the European arrest warrant is needed. I was particularly interested in section 18 amending section 45 of the 2003 Act, with the addition of paragraphs (a), (b) and (c). On paragraph (c), the Minister’s summary states that applications for surrender will not be refused due to minor or technical defects in the European arrest warrant, subject to the saver “when it could lead to an injustice”. It would be wonderful if such a clause could be applied pari passu to much of our domestic legislation.

How often have we seen certain District Court judges reject with unseemly glee charges, particularly those regarding motoring offences, because of some minor technical defect? We had an extremely long-winded impeachment procedure in these Houses because a warrant was marginally out of date. The older I get, the more impatient I become with captious judges and lawyers who string out and frustrate the course of justice and enormously increase its cost by such devices or technical objections. If we can override technical defects in the application of the European arrest warrant, why can we not apply the same spirit here in other domestic legislation?

I support the Bill and congratulate the Minister on his focus on remedying defects in the law which may contribute to the scale of the senseless loss of life we suffer from.

I welcome the opportunity to say a few words on this issue. I thank the Minister of State, Deputy Mansergh, for cutting his time short.

The issue of gun culture is extremely important. As the Minister of State mentioned, given our history of gun culture here, especially North of the Border, we need to make sure there are stringent controls. For 30 years we saw what free access to guns did to our nation, especially to the six Northern counties and the Border counties. Only the other day, the commemoration of the Dublin-Monaghan Bombing, which was part of the culture of using all sorts of tactics, was marked.

I support sporting organisations that have a proud record and compliment them on how they run their business and insist on their laws being upheld. They act very responsibly. There have been some questions in recent times about why more handguns are licensed in some areas than in others. One simply has to look at how that happens. It happens where there are shooting ranges and sporting activities. It does not happen for the wrong reasons.

I welcome the Minister's agreement that, in the main, the licences already issued will be retained, subject to the law and strict supervision. That is only right. However, the real problem is that we must ensure there is not a gun culture. I was interested to see the comments of the Garda Síochána Ombudsman commissioner, who has a background in the USA and said many guns used in the commission of crime in the United States have been stolen from their rightful owners.

When one understands the situation in the United States and how guns have been available there, one has to question if we are dealing with a situation which is somewhat different. A number of handguns here have been stolen from licensed holders and those guns, by definition, are immediately in criminal hands. I wonder if the Minister, in his conclusion, can give some idea of how many guns which have been stolen have been used, because my understanding is that it is very few.

I have talked at length to several of the people involved in gun clubs and they are very conscious of the dangerous weapon they hold in their hands. They assure me, in no uncertain terms, that they want to retain their rights and work strictly within the law. There is no question about that.

I welcome the fact that in his speech, the Minister emphasised that there was a great deal of consultation in recent times, at an intensive and productive level. The firearms consultative panel was established, comprising shooting interest groups, the Garda Síochána and members of the Department, with the introduction of a firearms licensing regime, provided for under the Criminal Justice Act 2006, and has met on a regular basis in the past 18 months. It has satisfied some of the great anxieties of gun clubs and I welcome that. The Minister said his Department also held a firearms conference in 2008, where more than 100 delegates from shooting interest groups, Departments and the Garda were in attendance. In February 2009, his Department, in conjunction with the Countryside Alliance, held a seminar.

I welcome all that and encourage the Minister to work with legitimate groups to make sure their rightful activities are allowed to continue in a constructive way. I note he mentioned in his speech those individuals going to the Special Olympics would have a possible right to get guns. They would need to have access to training to be eligible for that sort of thing.

I listened with interest to our Sinn Féin colleague, Deputy Ó Snodaigh, advising that there needs to be curtailment of the importation of guns and drugs. I commend the Garda and the other authorities that intercepted the massive amounts of drugs in Cork and other places. Guns were found in some of those drugs hauls. It is vital that we control the drug barons who are responsible for spreading drug use in towns and villages. I question who is ultimately benefitting from some of that funding.

We have had a rash of murders, especially in Limerick and in Dublin. That shows how dangerous guns can be if they get into the wrong hands. One cannot but recall the brilliant proposal by a predecessor of the Minister, Mr. McDowell, for a gun amnesty. He outlined that people would have to bring in their guns and explain about them. Such schemes do not work. One must provide a way for people to leave guns in without drawing attention to themselves. Otherwise, they will not get involved at all. It is important that we get as many illegally held guns out of the system as possible, as they are the ones that will be used to cause the damage and create mayhem and murder. They are the guns that will be used to rob banks and do damage to the future of this country.

One cannot help recalling some of the serious robberies or attempted robberies that took place. I congratulate the Garda once again on its involvement. Some incidents resulted in a sad end in that deaths occurred but at least it was not a garda who died. That brings me to the valid point in the Minister's speech about imitation guns. It is important that they be controlled as well as actual guns because things can happen in a split second and we cannot allow imitation guns to create a danger or to put lives at risk. It might be amusing for a person to walk around with an imitation gun but it would not be a joke if it were mistaken for a real gun and a shot were fired in response to it that resulted in a person losing his or her life. Imitation guns can also be used to scare elderly people in their homes. In addition, they can be used to rob people or to cause them serious hassle.

The previous speaker, the Minister of State, Deputy Mansergh, mentioned that he was annoyed that the land at Thornton Hall cost as much as it did. He is not the only one who was annoyed at that. I hope that whatever comes out of the Minister's new proposal for Thornton Hall he will be able to make a better job of it than his predecessors.

The developing knife culture is another issue of concern. It is unfortunate that it is so widespread. The Minister of State, Deputy Mansergh, reminded us of a case where a young lady was being beaten up and a passerby intervened. Another individual ran into a house and took out an ordinary knife to attack that person, which resulted in a fatal injury. As the Minister rightly said, that caused serious problems for the immediate family and those involved. That case emphasised the fact that an ordinary knife can be a deadly weapon. It shows how difficult it is to control knife culture. There is a danger that young people in particular are carrying certain types of knives in their pockets. We have seen that problem manifested recently in Kerry and other areas where people have died as a result of knife attacks. In one case, what initially started off as a happy occasion turned into a disaster. We must utilise whatever laws we can to curtail that type of incident. I welcome the measures in the Bill aimed at tackling the knife culture. I am encouraged by the fact that the Minister has included that provision in the Bill.

Fine Gael has a strong attitude to the control of illegal guns, knives and other weapons. I have no doubt that in the main we will support the Bill. My party spokesman may wish to amend certain sections but I hope that can be dealt with in a constructive manner on Committee Stage so that the Bill will be as foolproof as possible.

In the United States we have seen mass murders take place in many schools. We have seen what can happen if a gun culture is allowed to take hold. I welcome the Minister's initial statement that he wants to ensure that a gun culture is not allowed in this State. That was the case in the northern part of this country for far too long and it was destructive. As one who lived through that and had many friends involved in all the wrong ways, I wish to ensure that guns are only held by those who are entitled to have them, namely, gun clubs and licensed holders, the Garda and the Army. That is the way it should be. Public safety and control issues are paramount.

The Minister indicated that the number of murders involving firearms had reduced in the past 12 months. I find that difficult to believe but I hope it is true. I welcome the co-operation between the authorities here and other European countries. At a local level the Minister and I appreciate better than most the tremendous co-operation between the Garda and the PSNI in the efforts to deal with the Paul Quinn affair. That incident shows how important it is to have co-operation. It is equally important to have co-operation between various countries to control drugs and arms. I welcome the provisions of the Bill that will eventually lead to a Europe-wide approach to ensuring that arms are not for the use of criminals but those who are legally entitled to use them.

Debate adjourned.
Barr
Roinn