Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Crime Levels.

Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 5 May 2004

Wednesday, 5 May 2004

Ceisteanna (7, 8, 9)

Aengus Ó Snodaigh

Ceist:

7 Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will report on whether there is international evidence that arming police has the effect of reducing gun crime. [12738/04]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Kathleen Lynch

Ceist:

24 Ms Lynch asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will expand on his recently reported comments that the increase in gun crime may put at risk the unarmed status of the Garda; the number of gardaí who currently carry firearms or are authorised to do so; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12668/04]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Joe Costello

Ceist:

144 Mr. Costello asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will expand on his recently reported comments that the increase in gun crime may put at risk the unarmed status of the Garda; the number of gardaí who currently carry firearms or are authorised to do so; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12763/04]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí ó Béal (12 píosaí cainte)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 7, 24 and 144 together.

The short answer to Deputy Ó Snodaigh's question is that there is no such evidence. The Garda Síochána is one of the few remaining police forces in which uniformed members do not carry firearms. This is a tradition to be proud of. The first Garda Commissioner, Michael Staines, said: "The Garda Síochána will achieve success not by force of arms but by its moral authority as servants of the people." It is not my wish to have gardaí in uniform armed. I believe that if uniformed gardaí were armed it would entail a significant change in the culture of policing in this State and would have significant implications for the relationship between the force and members of the public. That would be regrettable. The approaches adopted by different countries to arming their police forces are deeply rooted in the cultures of those countries. It is, therefore, not useful to attempt to compare the effects their differing approaches to arming their police forces have on the rates of gun crime in those countries.

I recently published the provisional crime statistics for the first quarter of 2004. While they show a welcome reduction of 22% in incidents of possession of firearms, they also show an increase of 54% in incidents of discharge of firearms compared with the same period a year ago. Although this represents an increase in the number of incidents from 54 to a comparatively low 83, it is a matter of some concern, particularly in the context of a reduction of 6% in crime overall. It is obvious that if that trend continued for any significant period, maintaining an unarmed uniformed Garda Síochána would become more difficult.

This is not to say I will surrender to that trend. The answer is to introduce tougher sentences for armed criminals caught in possession of firearms and more effective measures to control their availability. I intend to bring forward proposals to Government to seek approval for the introduction of firearms control provisions of a more severe kind in the Criminal Justice Bill 2004, which I expect to publish during the current session. I also propose, in the context of such provisions, to examine the options in relation to penalties for firearms related offences and to consider, as part of the new tough regime, an amnesty for those who wish to surrender the firearms in their possession. This was done in the United Kingdom with considerable success.

My question related to a report in The Irish Times in which the Minister was quoted as saying that if the present trends continued indefinitely the question of maintaining an unarmed police force would arise. The Minister has a habit of taking policy decisions and introducing legislation in the absence of evidence of their effectiveness and sometimes contrary to the available evidence. We need only look at the prison escort service.

Does the Minister have plans at any stage of development or consideration to move from the current situation and to establish the Garda as a force which is armed in the course of its regular duty? On numerous occasions the Minister has raised concerns similar to mine regarding the level of gun crime in my constituency of Dublin South-Central, which I believe has the highest number of armed crimes involving a fatality in this and previous years. The Government has failed to tackle this aspect of crime in working class areas. Before the Minister goes down this route he must ensure that he examines all available evidence.

As I stated on a number of occasions, and again today, I have no intention of arming the Garda Síochána. I said that if we do not tackle gun crime effectively the question of maintaining our police force unarmed would, inevitably, arise. I posed that rhetorical question to persuade people to focus on the serious upsurge in the use of firearms, to which Deputy Ó Snodaigh referred.

The pattern of drugs and firearms being used by the same people and of the importation of drugs being accompanied by what are called lucky bags of firearms to service the enforcement needs of drugs warlords is a disturbing one. The possession of firearms is a very serious matter. It is not something which can be excused. In our society and circumstances, the possession of a sawn-off shotgun or a hand gun is inexcusable and must be punished severely. Those who are in possession of such firearms must realise that the entire community, especially the Judiciary, regard the possession of firearms as a very grave crime indeed, regardless of whether they are used on a particular occasion, and that heavy sentencing of a condign kind will be imposed on those who are found in possession of firearms. This matter seriously threatens the integrity of our State and requires a robust response from the Legislature, the Government, the Garda and, above all, the Judiciary. There is no room for faint hearts in this matter. If we believe in an unarmed Garda Síochána we must tackle gun crime very seriously.

Does the Minister agree that a 54% increase in the discharge of firearms this year is unacceptable, that a gun for hire culture is developing, gangland killings appear to be the order of the day in a considerable number of urban areas and the response of the security forces is not adequate to deal with the problem which has increased sharply in the past couple of years? Rather than articulating toughness, the Minister must make a co-ordinated plan to deal with the underlying issues related to drugs. Otherwise, the spectre of arming the Garda will continue to be raised. It is irresponsible to raise that spectre.

However, it is responsible to recognise that the Garda has been unarmed since the foundation of the State. The fine words of the first Garda Commissioner, Mr. Staines, were spoken during the Civil War. Since then, we have experienced 30 years of very serious trouble in Northern Ireland, which overflowed into this State, yet we still did not arm the Garda. The Minister must deal with this latest serious criminal issue, namely, gangland activity of which weapons are a major component.

I agree with the Deputy. I am not raising the spectre of arming the Garda as a serious proposition but because it is such an unthinkable result that the community must consider it a duty to take the steps necessary to counter the gun culture. Resolute action from the three arms of the State — legislative, executive and judicial — is necessary to counter this culture.

Murder, to which the Deputy referred, is an issue we must keep in perspective. For example, in the first three months of this year, there were fewer murders than in the first three months of the previous two years.

I referred to gangland murders. We must make the correct categorisations.

However, it would be naive to assume that the threat is diminishing from drug warlords and gangs and their weapons; it is not. Possession of a pistol should not be punishable by a three or four year sentence but should be treated as seriously as crimes such as rape and serious manslaughter. It must be dealt with seriously by the Judiciary with appropriate sentences acting as a deterrent.

It is difficult to break open criminal gangs because of the climate of fear and the threat of murder which underlies them. However, those found in possession of firearms should know they will go to jail for a very long time. It cannot be a matter of short sentences or of accepting the excuse, heard so often in court, that the accused is a small cog in a big machine and is not a Mr. Big. By heavily sentencing those at the lower end of criminal organisations, there will be some prospect of breaking gangs open and providing an inducement to get at the leading criminals. It is time for a sentencing policy which does not allow those who claim to be at the lower end of a gang, or to have acted unwisely, to be treated leniently for possession of firearms.

In some parts of the country, those who regard themselves as paramilitaries hire their weapons to criminals. This pattern has been observed in regard to a close correlation between the Real IRA and Continuity IRA and ordinary criminality, in the context of the lending of firearms to ordinary criminals to carry out murders. This is another issue which must be dealt with very seriously by the Judiciary.

The Minister is responsible.

It is a new version of guns for hire. Does the Minister accept that ministerial musings about the arming of the Garda Síochána are not to be encouraged and divert attention from the real problems and solutions? There is no need to encourage a focus on the increased use of firearms as the figures speak for themselves. In talking of solutions, does the Minister accept that any robust response proposed in the Legislature will not pose any problems as far as the Opposition is concerned? Will the Minister go further and consider issues such as the need for an organised crime unit? If Garda numbers were high enough, would such a unit be considered? Has such an approach worked in other countries and should we try it here? Should we consider the videotaping of witness statements so those who suffer amnesia when they come to court can be reminded of their statements? We must take a broader approach if we really wish to tackle serious crime.

On the last point, the criminal justice Bill, which I intend to publish in the next couple of weeks as soon as the parliamentary counsel has made the finishing touches which I eagerly await, will deal with the issue of the recanting of evidence in circumstances which give rise to public scandal and disquiet. However, the point I wish to get across is that we must improve our act in regard to serious crime, and I am glad of Deputy O'Keeffe's indication of support for a tougher legislative line.

When somebody is sentenced for possession or use of firearms, it is not simply a matter of that individual being dealt with as an isolated person but as part of a social phenomenon in the context of the increased use of firearms. The consequences of this are serious. From my point of view, the use of deterrent as opposed to purely rehabilitative sentences is justifiable in this area. Tough sentencing along such lines does have an effect. The members of the Judiciary are not isolated and do not live on another planet. I am glad there is recent evidence that serious drug dealing is attracting serious sentences.

What measures will the Minister take to ensure the Judiciary implements mandatory sentences? If deterrent sentences are to be introduced, they must be applied to those convicted.

Will the Minister consider instructing the Garda authorities to ensure that Garda informers who are also drug dealers are arrested and charged, and that there would be no toleration by the Garda authorities of those importing significant numbers of the lucky bags referred to by the Minister, containing weapons and drugs, which kill people throughout working class areas? Three out of four violent deaths in my area since the start of the year have been drug related.

I agree it is important that whatever sentences are prescribed by statute are regarded by the Judiciary as the norm rather than the exception. I remind Deputy Ó Snodaigh that I have not remarked, because this is a constructive debate on the need to remove firearms from Irish society, that there are people close enough to the party of which he is a member who should take his rhetoric to heart and give up their firearms also.

Barr
Roinn