Gerard Murphy (Cork North West, Fine Gael)

It is worth considering the Acts this Bill will amend. They include the Bail Act 1997, the Criminal Justice Act 1984, the Offences Against the State (Amendment) Act 1998, the Misuse of Drugs Act 1977, the Firearms Acts 1925 to 2006, the Garda Síochána Act 2005, the Criminal Justice Act 2006, the Sea-Fisheries and Marine Jurisdiction Act 2006, and the Fisheries (Amendment) Act 2003. That amounts to one Act in 1997, one in 1998, one in 2003, two Acts in 2005 and two Acts passed last year in 2006. During that period, the person who is now Tánaiste sat at the Cabinet table as Attorney General; he remains Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. A Cabinet colleague held that portfolio for the preceding years of an era when zero tolerance was promised regarding crime. When the Government originally came to power, some ten years ago, a large part of its manifesto dealt with law and order. For the two previous years, the then Opposition spokesmen had hounded the then Minister, Nora Owen, on the issue.

Nora Owen was an excellent Minister for Justice, and her performance in the Department reflected Fine Gael's strong stance on law and order since the foundation of the State. With our strong commitment to democracy and stand against terror, our party has always stood firmly by the institutions of the State, particularly the Garda Síochána, one of its first pillars put in place by the Provisional Government of 1923. The Garda was accorded unequivocal support, with no hesitation or secret deals to undermine its authority.

For the first five years of this Government, the talk of zero tolerance came to nothing. The previous Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform failed utterly to live up to the expectations he had created while in Opposition. The nation suffered five years of failing policies, inept management of the justice portfolio, and constantly increasing crime rates. The people had elected that Government in the hope that old and young alike might be able to walk the streets safely, that the elderly might be safe in their homes at night, and that young people might go out to enjoy themselves of an evening without the fear of being mugged.

The then Government made a well-documented and deliberate effort to distort the true crime figures before the last general election. It did not release the new figures until afterwards. After five years of Fianna Fáil and the Progressive Democrats in power and promising zero tolerance of crime, the figures were increasing constantly. Everything was supposed to change when a new Government was formed, with a Progressive Democrats Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform armed with manifesto commitments to solve our law and order problems. That manifesto clearly promised to increase the strength of the Garda Síochána by 2,000. The programme for Government stated that the Administration would complete the current expansion of the Garda Síochána and increase numbers by a further 2,000.

The electorate bought the package once again, the difference this time being that it was promised by the Progressive Democrats. A watchdog of that party, as Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, was to deliver. The irony is that the Minister knew that, without spending substantial sums on training facilities, Templemore did not have the capacity to deliver anything like the figures promised. Crime continues to rise at an alarming rate. Not only that, but Garda Síochána stations are being downgraded in various parts of the country. The Government has created that situation. Despite talking constantly of its care and concern for rural Ireland, it collaborated with An Post in closing post offices and is now determined that rural Garda stations should be downgraded, leaving residents totally insecure and without any real Garda protection.

The Government's time in office is now nearly over, but when will it realise that the only way to reduce crime is to make gardaí more noticeable on the streets? We must have more gardaí on the beat and better targeting of crime hot-spots. Additional resources are needed for crime prevention and enforcement, as well as to provide special education and employment programmes for deprived communities. The watchdog is doing no better than the zero-tolerance Minister who preceded him.

The real problem is that the Government does not seem to realise that hardening restrictions and punishments alone will not solve the crime problem. If that were the case, we would have done so by now. The Minister has produced Bill after Bill, with others to amend those that were supposed to have solved the problem in the first instance. This Bill is yet another attempt to rectify problems in previous Bills that were clearly pointed out to the Minister when they were introduced.

Virtually all the changes that the Minister is introducing in this Bill, as in other recent legislation, are Opposition proposals. Recently he was forced to adopt a Labour recommendation for the protection of children that he had failed to introduce. The Bill provides for the electronic tagging of suspects released on bail. Deputy Kenny has proposed the same thing for some time, but the Minister previously considered it a ludicrous idea.

Fine Gael has proposed a special Garda unit to combat gangland crime, electronic tagging, anti-social behaviour orders, and making it an offence to be a member of a criminal gang, and has also introduced a Private Members' Bill to allow home-owners greater protection against intruders. None of those ideas was acceptable to the Minister, but as the election approached, and the Progressive Democrats stood at 1% in the polls, he needed a major PR exercise very badly in order to convince the electorate belatedly that he was the real law and order Minister.

After five years as Attorney General and another five as Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, at all times accorded unstinting support by a Fianna Fáil Party still reeling from its failure to implement a zero-tolerance crime policy, all that he can offer is more legislation and no results. The Minister has spent more time introducing legislation to this House than any other Minister. He constantly introduces new legislation, and we are constantly told that he has the problem under control, yet every statistic and figure clearly shows us that it is out of control and that every measure that he or the Government has taken over the last ten years has been ineffective.

The only real lack of consensus regarding the Bill concerns the undue haste with which it is being passed into law, a serious concern given the Government's record. The Bill amends and adds to laws already in existence. The usual consultation process with interested parties has not been implemented, and there are genuine concerns that protections being removed by the legislation will lead to serious miscarriages of justice. The constitutional implications have not fully been considered, and the Minister has once again been warned by the legal profession, the Judiciary, and civil rights activists of inherent flaws in the legislation.

To push ahead with such undue haste is another sign of the reckless and imprudent actions of a Minister desperate to make an impact before an election. Although there appears to be a consensus that these harsh measures are necessary, it makes it all the more important for this House to examine their potential outcomes. We should really be asking ourselves how we have let it come to this.

Why do we need more severe legislation than many other countries in order to enforce our laws? Over the past few years, experience has clearly shown that laws alone do not work. There are many reasons for this but probably the most basic is social inequality. There is no doubt that ten years of a right-of-centre Government have contributed to this situation. There is no doubt either that a concentration on individual rights, rather than the social well-being of a community, adds to an atmosphere in society that encourages crime. Inequalities in housing and education are basic symptoms that lead to crime in our communities. Unfortunately, this has led to mainstream public opinion believing that if the punishment is severe enough it will prevent crime, yet our recent deliberations on the Prisons Bill clearly demonstrated otherwise. Over a quarter of prisoners find themselves back in jail within 12 months of being released. There is considerable evidence that having experienced the company of hardened criminals in prison, those sentenced for relatively minor offences can graduate to more serious crimes.

See this speech in context