Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 9 March 2006
9 Mr. Sherlock asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his views on the series of pipe bomb incidents which occurred in Dublin in recent weeks that required the presence of Army bomb disposal experts; if he is concerned at the prevalence of such incidents; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7174/06]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe Deputy will be aware that there have been three recorded incidents involving the use of so-called pipe bombs recently in Dublin, all of which required the services of an Army explosives ordnance disposal, EOD, team.
In the first incident, which occurred at approximately 4.25 p.m. on 8 February 2006 outside a residence in Coolock, a small, flask-like object fell from the boot of a car on to the ground and broke. Moments later, thankfully after the persons in the immediate vicinity, whose suspicions were raised, had an opportunity to move away, the device exploded causing minor damage to nearby cars. Fortunately, no persons were injured. An Army EOD team attended the scene and confirmed that a pipe bomb had exploded and that the area was clear.
In the second incident, which occurred on 10 February outside a residence at Roseglen Avenue in Kilbarrack, a substantial explosion occurred under a car parked in the driveway. Significant damage was caused to the car in question and to the front of the residence, although again, thankfully, no persons were injured. The services of an Army EOD team were sought, and a thorough examination of the scene revealed no further devices.
Unlike the previous two incidents, the third incident, which occurred at approximately 8 a.m. on 15 February, involved a hoax device placed underneath the private car of a member of the Garda Síochána attached to the national bureau of criminal investigation. At the time, the car was parked in the driveway of the member's private residence. Again, an Army EOD team attended the scene and determined, after expert examination, that the device was a hoax.
In all three cases, the scenes were preserved for technical examination. The devices were examined by the Garda technical bureau and the three incidents remain under active investigation.
Given the spate of such incidents in what is a relatively short period of time, it is natural that there has been much speculation about possible links between the incidents. While the incidents remain under investigation, and I do not wish to pre-empt the outcome, it is not possible to be definitive on the matter. However, at the moment the Garda believes there is no link and that the three cases all involve different people doing different things.
There has also been speculation that the pipe bombs were manufactured by dissident republican groups and sold on to criminal gangs. I am not in a position to confirm or deny this speculation, but I do not believe the three incidents are connected, even on the basis of the manufacturer of the devices. Without commenting on any specific incident, there is concern about interaction between dissident republican groups and criminal gangs. The situation is further complicated by the involvement of the groups themselves in general criminality.
Although there were three such devices in fairly rapid order, the evidence seems to suggest they were unconnected, different in character and not put together by the same people — a coincidence rather than a pattern.
I thank the Minister for his reply. Does he agree that such a huge increase in the use of firearms as we have seen recently is extremely alarming? There was an increase of 20% in the seizure of firearms in 2005 over 2004 and a 250% increase in the number of fatalities from firearms arising from gangland feuds etc. Now pipe bombs have appeared on the crime scene in north Dublin, not to mention the tragic shooting a couple of days ago of Donna Cleary in the same general area. This indicates that a substantial amount of dangerous weaponry is coming into the country which is linked to drugs and being used in a more indiscriminate fashion than could have been contemplated in the past. There seems to be very little that the authorities, including the Minister and the Garda Síochána, can do about it. It is causing considerable alarm in the public domain as citizens worry that this lawlessness and criminality is becoming commonplace. It has progressed from a very unusual occurrence involving few deaths a few years ago to widespread attacks on human life.
The Deputy has had one minute.
What steps is the Minister taking——
It is a slightly different question but since the Deputy asked——
What steps——
Let the Minister answer, Deputy.
The Minister has answered a question I have not asked, which he has a great habit of doing.
The Deputy is entitled to a minute for his question but has already had a minute and a half. It is in the interests of Deputies that we have order at Question Time. If it was left to the Deputies today, we would have answered approximately four questions in an hour and a quarter.
I asked no question good, bad or indifferent subsequent to one of the questions I asked the Minister. The Minister cannot blame the Judiciary.
The Deputy should ask a question.
What steps is the Government taking to ensure that we put an end to this type of criminal behaviour?
There is a significant difference between firearms and pipe bombs and the firearms issue is far more serious.
Pipe bombs are dangerous.
Pipe bombs are lethal. What is the Minister talking about?
Allow the Minister to reply.
This is raiméis.
What am I talking about?
We are talking about people being killed.
Is a hoax pipe bomb a firearm?
Deputy Broughan's constituency has been subjected to this lawlessness on a regular basis.
Yes. A family has been terrorised.
I ask that the Deputies allow the Minister to reply without interruption.
People must check their cars every day.
If the Deputy continues, I intend to adjourn the House without taking the Adjournment debate.
We are not talking about Dublin 4, rather the northside.
In two weeks, we will debate the amendments to the Criminal Justice Bill in the Select Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights. They will introduce significant increases in minimum sentences for firearms offences. There will be an amnesty in respect of firearms and new offences in respect of sawn-off shotguns and the like.
The Deputy mentioned the Judiciary. In respect of mandatory minimum sentences, I wanted to say in this House and I will publish a document this afternoon to prove the hypocrisy in the House in recent days where tablets were consumed in large amounts and mock theatricals took place.
The Minister opposed the Criminal Justice (Public Order) Act 1994 when it was a Bill.
The Minister without interruption.
Will the Deputy listen?
I remember that the Minister opposed the Act when he sat on the other side of the House.
If the Deputy has such a good memory, he will recall that both Opposition parties, which are now speaking about minimum mandatory sentences, strongly opposed that notion.
The Minister is not answering the question. The Ceann Comhairle must make the Minister answer.
Deputy Costello's colleague, Deputy McManus, strongly opposed the introduction of mandatory minimum sentences at the time.
That is totally irrelevant. Shouting and roaring is not the way to address the issue.
Deputy Jim Higgins rather than Deputy Jim O'Keeffe was the Fine Gael spokesman at the time. He opposed mandatory minimum sentences and claimed they were unconstitutional.
The Minister's time has concluded. I would like to give Deputy Jim O'Keeffe an opportunity to ask a brief question.
The Minister's colleague, the Tánaiste and Minister for Health and Children——
Let us remember the recent hypocrisy in the House of people who have always opposed firm laws.
The Minister opposed the Act. He is singing a different tune and should go back to the PD——
I ask that Deputy Jim O'Keeffe be allowed to submit a question.
Let us remember a pair of parties that were hounded out of office because they ran down the number of gardaí and the prison service.
The Minister should do something about this matter instead of talking about it.
I ask the Minister to allow Deputy Jim O'Keeffe to ask a brief supplementary question.
We will debate mandatory sentencing——
It would be a waste of time to bring in new legislation when we have not agreed the amendments to the Criminal Justice Bill. The Minister only has the heads of the Bill.
Deputy Costello should allow Deputy Jim O'Keeffe to ask his question. We must conclude.
We will debate mandatory sentencing in its proper time. We do not have mandatory sentences as there is such a "let out" clause.
The Deputy opposes the amendments. He said they are unconstitutional.
They are not there.
Has the Deputy a question?
We do not have mandatory sentencing as the "let out" clause means mandatory sentencing is only applied in 5% of cases, but that is a separate issue. I want to go back to the issue of pipe bombs.
The Deputy wants time.
Does the Minister accept that the use of pipe bombs in Dublin, which are usually associated with Northern Ireland, is a sinister development?
The Minister does not accept that. Can the Deputy not hear that the Minister is waffling about something irrelevant?
Is it correct to say that this development is the result of an alliance between so-called republican elements and gangland criminals?
There were three pipe bombs, the technical examination of which has not established a link between them — some of them are quite dissimilar. On the speculation that they were supplied to members of criminal gangs by members of paramilitary groups, it has not been established.
What will the Minister do about it?
Will the Deputy allow me to use the minute available? I am aware that certain paramilitary units have been in close alliance with ordinary criminals to a significant degree. To answer Deputy Jim O'Keeffe's first question, I believe it is sinister. Putting a bomb or mock bomb——
Will the Minister do anything other than promise more legislation?
Will the Deputy stay quiet? I am trying to use my time.
Allow the Minister to respond. We will move on to the Adjournment debate.
He is changing his tune.
I submitted this question to get an answer, not a specious lecture.
The Deputy is fascist. He shouts down everybody in the House.
I ask that the Minister draw his remarks to a conclusion.
There is a pair of shouting cornerboy fascists across the floor.
The Minister is a cornerboy Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform.
He is a model cornerboy.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.
