Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the broad provisions of the Bill and on the issues of crime, law and order. Many of the provisions are very welcome. Section 4 has been long overdue in that there have been numerous cases in recent times where forensic evidence at a crime scene was not preserved and could be tampered with or was exposed to the elements. Vital information and clues that could have led to a prosecution were removed either covertly or by other means.

In terms of addressing the problems of serious crime, the balance of power seems to be tipped in favour of the accused as opposed to being in favour of society at large. There can be good reasons for the public assuming that, particularly when cases on which they believe convictions will be secured are overturned on appeal on what could be considered a technicality. That diminishes the public's confidence in the Garda Síochána pursuing a case, bringing it to court and securing a successful prosecution.

As technology and forensic science advances, the need to preserve a crime scene is becoming more valuable. We did not have the capability of DNA testing in the past. Only basic physical evidence was gathered but with the advances in technology and forensic science, the protection of a crime scene is vital. Section 4 provides for that in a sensible manner. A garda who is in a lawful place, and assuming a crime has been committed, can preserve that crime scene and the order can be extended for a number of hours by a superintendent seeking same from a District Court.

I welcome other sections in the Bill. I referred to section 13 earlier. On the area of DNA and forensic samples, perhaps we should consider the question of trying to create a proper DNA data bank. Figures show that where a large data bank has been built up over years in other countries, and used very effectively, it has led to serious crimes being prosecuted successfully. Experts and scientists would agree that DNA testing is a very accurate way of identifying a suspect or eliminating a person from an inquiry. It can work both ways.

Civil liberties groups and the Human Rights Commission have made valuable points and will make submissions to the Law Reform Commission on this area. If a citizen suspected of committing a crime is brought into a station and provides DNA sampling voluntarily, the test can prove his or her innocence, assuming he or she is innocent, and he or she can be released. DNA testing would advance people's rights and ensure that a person is not detained for longer than necessary if the DNA system can be pursued through voluntary codes.

Section 13 also provides for saliva sampling. I was amazed to discover that it was considered an intimate act to remove saliva from a person. Hair follicles can be removed now also, which would be considered another useful source of DNA. Those procedures are very important to the Garda Síochána in trying to fight crime.

I saw some statistics recently which indicated that successful prosecutions were obtained in Scotland in a number of serious crimes through the use of DNA testing. One person who had committed numerous rapes was eventually detected many years later through DNA sampling. We must give the Garda Síochána the opportunity to use all available science and assist it in every way in that regard. The public should not be concerned about abuse of that since it is scientific more than anything else. We should be supportive of DNA testing and encourage people to voluntarily provide DNA samples if they are suspects in a crime. That is something we should push forward as much as possible.

Some very responsible contributions were made to the debate but some Opposition Members complain that crime is rampant in our society. I reject that. Statistics show that crime is not rampant in our society. Our streets, compared with most European countries, are very safe. We have issues with public order offences and anti-social behaviour, but in general most citizens feel reasonably safe in their communities in comparison with other large cities throughout Europe.

There is no doubt there has been an escalation of firearms crimes and that since the ceasefire in the North, some of the arms used by paramilitaries have been siphoned off to a number of serious criminal elements rather than being decommissioned. There is a proliferation of guns in society and it is a problem we should acknowledge and address. I am aware the Minister is examining the possibility of having a firearms amnesty. I would support such a measure. It was used in Britain some years ago for knives and thousands of lethal weapons were handed in voluntarily. If we had an amnesty here before we enact serious provisions in legislation to deal with people who hold illegally held firearms, it might assist in taking a number of weapons out of circulation.

I must refer to Operation Anvil and the deaths of two suspects in a post office raid. We must be conscious of the fact that if people go out one morning to raid a post office using firearms, the State has a duty to support the Garda Síochána in every way possible. They should try to apprehend the suspects without a firefight but in the event of that happening, gardaí have every right to defend themselves using lethal force if necessary. We should not jump to conclusions immediately about that. There is a mechanism in place whereby a senior Garda member can investigate such incidents. People will be satisfied with that because such an investigation should be done by an outside body. I believe more independent people should investigate such incidents but firearms are seldom used by members of the Garda Síochána. We have had two deaths recently but attacking the gardaí involved as if they were the ones who did the wrong deed on that morning is despicable. We must be supportive of the Garda. We cannot ask members of the force to take on serious hardened criminals who intimidate communities and arms of the State and then assume they overreact when they use force. If we are to be supportive of the Garda Síochána, we should be more moderate in our language and not jump to conclusions.

With regard to the Morris tribunal, that issue is something we must address also. The majority of people have confidence in the members of the Garda Síochána. Its members have served the State well over the years. There is no doubt that developments in the Morris tribunal and its findings have cast a cloud over the force and, more than anybody else, the members of the Garda Síochána are hurt by the findings. They feel betrayed by a number of senior members of the force in that this type of activity could take place through the ranks of the Garda. We must accept that will damage the public's confidence in the Garda Síochána to a certain extent but we set up a tribunal, it has reached conclusions and we should deal with those and implement any recommendations. I have no difficulty with an independent ombudsman investigating complaints against members of the Garda Síochána. Most members of the force have no difficulty with it either because they take pride in their uniform and in their sworn oath to uphold the laws of the State and protect our society. We should move expeditiously on that because this cloud has been hanging over the Garda for some time. We have the tribunal findings and we should act swiftly on them.

Anti-social behaviour has been spoken about on numerous occasions recently. Members on all sides of the House want to speak about and highlight the problem because it affects all public representatives. Not a day or a week goes by when Deputies from urban areas, particularly those representing rural areas with large conurbations, are asked for transfers by people in local authority houses because of anti-social behaviour and intimidation. The ambience in these estates is being ruined by a few individuals and we have failed to address that problem. The Garda will say it has more serious crimes to deal with and that resources must be used in the fight against serious crime. I accept that, but if we do not address the root problems and deal with juveniles who get involved in minor anti-social behaviour, many of them will end up committing more serious crime which will bring them into the criminal justice system.

Some people oppose the measures on anti-social behaviour orders, which would be issued in the civil courts initially and, if breached, could become a criminal case. The bottom line is that if we were to enact the legislation, and if it were to be complied with, and prosecutions were brought by members of the Garda, we would criminalise youths on a regular basis in the Children's Court anyway. I fail to understand the argument that this Bill would criminalise large numbers of young people. If the provisions in the Children Act were implemented we would criminalise them anyway. There is now a provision that would provide for a yellow card system to the authorities. If there is a wayward offender, a person involved in serious forms of anti-social behaviour, the anti-social behaviour orders would be an effective system. It is important to differentiate between teenage pranks and serious continuing anti-social behaviour.

I recently travelled to Britain to observe the implementation of anti-social behaviour orders and acceptable behaviour contracts on young people. From speaking to people on whom they had been served, and speaking to communities who have had to live with serious intimidation causing alarm and distress not just to a few people but to a whole community, I found that there has been a transformation of the community. In Ireland I see an opportunity to go a step further and ensure anti-social behaviour orders are served judiciously.

Equally, if a person offends and an order is made, support services should be brought in immediately to assist that person. He or she may come from a dysfunctional background, in which there may be drug abuse, psychological problems or the myriad of other problems with which children grow up. We cannot allow them to continue on their way just because they grew up in a dysfunctional background or have behavioural problems. It is grossly unfair to the community but it is also neglect on the part of the State in turning a blind eye to a child experiencing problems. The anti-social behaviour orders or acceptable behaviour contracts give us an opportunity to bring that person into the system, to allow us to provide services and support.

There may be problems with parenting. In Britain there is a parental order, where parents incapable of parenting are given skills, support and assistance. Very often parents are not capable of parenting because they may also be in a local authority housing estate without community support or the support of close family. That is something that needs to be examined.

On the Children's Court, not all of the provisions of the Children Act have been enacted. We all accept that.

See this speech in context