Brian O'Shea (Waterford, Labour)

Tááthas orm an seans a fháil arís inniu páirt a ghlacadh sa díospóireacht thábhachtach seo. Mar a dúirt an Teachta Costello, urlabhraí an Pháirtí Lucht Oibre ar chúrsaí dlí agus cirt, comhionannais agus athchóirithe dlí, dúirt an chéad choimisinéir ar na gardaí, Michael Staines, i 1922 go n-éireodh leis na gardaí leis an údarás mórálach a bhí acu seachas cumhacht le hairm nó méid an fhórsa. Dúirt an Teachta Costello freisin go raibh an ráiteas sin an-chróga ag an am sin. Bhí an Cogadh Cathartha ag tosú agus bhí fir faoi airm thart ar an tír. Bhí na focail sin cróga ach bhí críonnacht ag baint leo freisin. Níl na gardaí faoi airm go fóill agus tá sé soiléir gur cosaint é sin do na gardaíó bunaíodh an fórsa agus ina theannta sin, cosaint é don phobal i gcoitinne.

Tá Bille an Gharda Síochána 2004 tábhachtach. Tá rudaí maithe ann ach tá laigí ann freisin gur féidir a leasú. Beidh an Teachta Costello ag tabhairt faoi leasaithe sin ar Chéim an Choiste.

The Garda Síochána's record is excellent. Since the foundation of the State, it has been a most effective unarmed force. It came into being when the Civil War began and later it had to cope with 30 years of paramilitary violence and serious crime. Its work has not been easy, with incidents such as those encountered in Donegal, which brought no credit to the force. However, its contribution to the State has been immense. It has lost members in protecting society and dealing with crime.

The Garda and the prison system will not eliminate crime in society. In particular, low level crime proves to be a source of fear for many vulnerable people in society. Elderly people live in fear of young people, wearing jackets with hoods, hovering outside their homes. As they all dress the same way with these hoods, they are unidentifiable. We must find a solution to the problem of these unidentified young people who gather in an intimidatory manner and who might also be carrying out crime and vandalism and generally indulging in anti-social behaviour.

I mentioned last week that when the Education (Welfare) Act was going through the House I sought to have it amended to provide for education welfare officers. As a former teacher, I considered such an amendment necessary to deal with children who are at risk of becoming involved in anti-social behaviour, crime, substance abuse and so forth. These children are identifiable at a young age by teachers. The problem is that whereas there are many agencies and Departments to deal with them, the services are not co-ordinated and the greatest weakness is that there is no specific desk at which the buck stops.

A welfare officer should be appointed for each VEC area. Cases would be referred to that officer in the first instance by teachers, the gardaí or anybody who sees a child at risk and believes there is a need for that child, and perhaps its parents, to be assisted. If we are to have any success in steering young people away from leading worthless lives, they must be dealt with in a holistic manner, that is, in the context of the family. Where parents are in dereliction of their duty to their children either through lack of parenting skills or downright neglect, they could be brought before the education welfare officer. This could be done not in a confrontational manner but in a way which allows the situation to be judged and a plan to be devised to assist the parents, with the help of the support organisations, to bring that family back to an even keel so the children can grow up to be useful members of society. Currently, the buck is passed and no person has responsibility for ensuring, for example, that such a plan is implemented. The education officer should have the power to call the agencies and Departments to account if a representative of a Department or agency did not deliver or did not co-operate fully with other organisations.

This illustrates a weakness in the legislation before us. A great opportunity was lost with regard to establishing an independent commission on policing, such as was established in Northern Ireland on foot of the Good Friday Agreement. The commission, which had a year to complete its work, consulted far and wide. It took written submissions and heard oral evidence and the views and opinions of various stakeholders on policing.

Many people in society feel alienated from the system. We often hear about low level crime. It can be devastating for vulnerable people but it is virtually impossible to secure a conviction for such crime. There is the problem of evidence. All too often people who can give evidence are afraid to do so. This is understandable given the circumstances that pertain in large urban areas. Equally, it is difficult, if not impossible, to secure a conviction when there is no forensic evidence as a result of the gardaí being called after the culprits are long gone. The solution to this problem lies in preventing it occurring, as best one can, through the education welfare officer system I have proposed.

I recall an urban area in my constituency where young men would emerge in the early afternoon, following a morning spent in bed, and assemble in a public area to drink beer from cans. I cannot say if they were also taking drugs. At least some of these young people were in receipt of unemployment assistance. To qualify for unemployment assistance a person must be available for work and genuinely seeking work. Where the gardaí become aware of people behaving in that manner there should be a duty on them to report it to the Department of Social and Family Affairs so the people involved can be taken to task in regard to their efforts to seek employment and to be available for work.

These people are paid money by the State to which, in the right circumstances, they are entitled. However, they use it to purchase drink. They are allowed to do that but the practice of consuming drink on the street means they constitute a nuisance at best or, at worst and all too often, intimidators. This matter should be urgently examined. People need enough money to survive but obviously these people can survive and still have enough money to purchase alcohol. It is not a straightforward situation but it might be possible to bring these people to their senses if they are made to realise that if they are getting paid unemployment assistance they should not use it to get drunk in a public area and make that area hell for others.

This Bill is deficient in addressing these issues. The opportunity was missed to conduct wider consultation and to put a commission in place when this legislation was being drafted. With the Patten model there was consultation with every police station and the views of people were heard. Every area has a different story and different problems but some areas might have devised ways of preventing the continuation of low level, intimidatory crime.

I welcome the joint policing committees proposed in the legislation. However, there are faults, in that the provisions are not sufficiently comprehensive. I refer Members to the Labour Party's document on the police force, which was produced by my colleague, Deputy Howlin, and which was substantially based on the Patten model. These committees have commendable duties to perform. The members are to consist of nominated members of local authorities and that is how it should be. Members of the Garda Síochána on the committees will be nominated by the Garda Commissioner. Members of the Oireachtas will also be on the committees, as will persons nominated by other bodies. The guidelines on these joint policing committees have not yet been circulated but the community and voluntary sector should have places on these committees by right. Many of these community and voluntary groups have a great knowledge of what it is like to be a victim of anti-social behaviour and low level crime. The feed of information that could come from this sector is an important ingredient to develop police policies that will make our country a better place in which to live. I hope that the Minister looks at this on Committee Stage. The joint policing committees need to be as small as possible to be effective. However, the main players should be included, and they would comprise all those groups that have a real contribution to make.

See this speech in context