On section 2, I got your note, a Chathaoirligh, that amendments Nos. 1 to 7 are out of order on the grounds which you have described and therefore I am not in a position to move them. I understand that I can comment on them. The purpose in putting down this set of amendments is to draw attention to the implications of the Bill for specific categories. In that context I would like the Minister to consider introducing amendments to meet the needs of these special categories on which I will elaborate on Report Stage. The basic problem is a breakdown in law and order which has led to vandalism, arson, burglaries and so on. In the Second Stage debate the Minister acknowledged that there is a serious problem of vandalism and related problems in relation to educational establishments, particularly schools. The intention behind the amendments is that schools should continue to enjoy compensation entitlement in accordance with the Malicious Injuries Acts. There is no question but that schools have come under severe attacks from vandals and thieves especially in crime prone urban areas in Dublin, Limerick and Cork.
It is predicted by the insurance industry that insurance premiums in the major urban areas will increase by 45 per cent for primary schools and by 30 per cent for post primary schools. This additional premium cost will be on top of a very severe increase in insurance premiums in the Dublin area. Since 1982 insurance premiums for schools have been loaded by up to 100 per cent already. In the case of primary schools there will be a further 45 per cent increase on top of this.
In relation to the next amendment and the impact of this Bill on recreational or sporting facilities, again the basic problem is crime. Malicious injuries claims arise because of vandalism, arson and burglaries. One of the most effective ways of countering crime, which is the kernal of the problem, is to provide sporting and recreational facilities for our young people. I have listed a small number of organisations that are affected: the GAA, the Football Association of Ireland, the Irish Rugby Football Union and the Golfing Union of Ireland. A host of other sporting and recreational organisations provide invaluable physical activity for young people to keep them occupied in useful activities of that kind. These voluntary and sporting organisations are providing an invaluable service to the community through the provisions of these facilities. Not alone do they keep people out of trouble by providing the opportunity for physical activity, but these activities in turn lead to an approach to discipline and they generate a community spirit.
I would ask the Minister to consider for Report Stage an amendment giving exemption to recreational and sporting facilities from the provisions of the Bill. These organisations are making a valuable contribution to community life. Sport and recreation provide an important antidote to crime and are a valuable source for countering crime. They are conducted by people who give voluntarily of their services. They make a contribution to tackling the crime problem which is the kernal of the malicious injuries problem.
The third amendment relates to the consequences of the breakdown in law and order for religious, charitable or voluntary services. Community centres and churches, for example, have been subjected to vandalism and arson. It is estimated in the case of churches and community centres that, following this Bill, insurance premiums will rise by at least 12½ per cent in urban areas. The breakdown in law and order is such that some churches have to be locked up completely in the day time to protect their property. Community centres are under severe pressure because insurance costs are already so high on these voluntary groups. My information is that the insurance on an average community centre amounts to £2,000 per annum. This is a very substantial imposition. It is now envisaged in urban areas that there will be a 12½ per cent increase on that. The people who run community centres do so voluntarily by giving generously of their spare time. They are making a valuable contribution to society by acting as an antidote to crime which is the key problem. Surely these centres deserve special consideration and therefore should be entitled to compensation under this law.
I referred on Second Stage to another vulnerable area, cars and motor cycles. The insurance industry have predicted that following the implementation of the Bill, a 5 per cent increase will be imposed on those with comprehensive cover with higher premiums for those with third party cover. An undesirable by-product of this is that high premiums already are contributing to the severe uninsured driving problem — it is estimated that 20 per cent of those driving vehicles are uninsured. Further additional premium increase will put insurance further out of reach.
Talking about people being able to afford to run vehicles, the Irish motorist is the most highly taxed in Europe, and considering that already he makes a considerable contribution to the Exchequer he should not have to bear the additional increase in cover in respect of damage and theft of cars. Because of the current scale of crime there is a special case for exempting cars and motor cycles from the provisions of the Bill.
Amendment No. 5 refers to the impact of the removal of protection for malicious injuries from the farming community. Farmers are good at making their case and have been through the decades, but they are under considerable pressure on a variety of fronts — weather, prices and so on. I based my amendment on the case farmers have to make. Protection of farmers under the 1981 Act is being removed and considering farmers' difficulties, they deserve special consideration.
I will turn to amendment No. 7, relating specifically to local authorities who are being put in an anomalous and unfair position in regard to malicious injury claims. They should be entitled to seek compensation like everybody else for malicious acts by illegal organisations. For instance, the ESB and Telecom Éireann can continue to claim in the case of riots or acts by illegal organisations, when their properties are damaged. This is not so in the case of local authorities. Those in Border counties in particular are very vulnerable. A case in point is the burning of Monaghan Courthouse. The Department of Justice contributed to the cost of restoring the building, but the balance of the bill was carried by the county council. Local authorities are unable to claim when their properties are damaged. Courthouses and town halls could be damaged during peaceful protests which end up in riots. Unfortunately, this is not a remote possibility any more. For example, the recent skirmishes during the Orange marches in Rossnowlagh in Donegal are a case in point; it could have spilled over and caused damage to public property. The burning of the British Embassy some years ago in Dublin is another case. Council property, being a symbol of order and authority in the community, could be targets for riots or malicious acts by illegal organisations. Therefore council property should be covered like that of State-sponsored bodies.