Denis Naughten (Longford-Roscommon, Fine Gael)

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Bill. While I am in favour of legislation that will boost the fight against crime, there needs to be a balance. While the Minister has introduced a stick, the checks and balances needed are not in place. I will focus on one area in this regard. While the Oireachtas is conferring additional and wide-ranging powers on the Garda, there must also be a balance between rights and responsibilities. One example that gives grounds for concern is the taking of bodily samples, for which there is provision in the legislation. There is also an issue as regards the extension of periods of detention without the requirement to bring a person before a judicial authority. That gives rise for concern, not only from the viewpoints of the individuals in detention but also for the Garda. The more additional powers that are given without the necessary checks and balances being in place, the greater the opportunity for complaints to be made against the Garda by individuals, sometimes unjustifiably. In the interests of the force and the citizen, a balance must be put in place. Sadly, that detail is not provided in this legislation.

I want to focus on the issue of bodily samples, fingerprints and photographs. The Irish Human Rights Commission has made a detailed submission on this. The commission has requested that a set of formal guidelines be put in place as regards such samples. It has made a number of significant recommendations as regards, for example, affording reasonable privacy to individuals in custody, noting that a person of the same sex should be present and that the taking of bodily samples should not involve any cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment. I will return to this topic in a couple of minutes. This should be the norm not alone for the suspect, but also for the Garda Síochána and the health professionals involved. I hope samples will be taken by nurses, medical practitioners or dentists, depending on the procedure involved, rather than gardaí. In the case of children or incapacitated persons an independent witness should be present. These basic protections should be introduced.

Another recommendation made by the Human Rights Commission was to record on video the taking of bodily samples in all circumstances except when a suspect does not wish to have the procedure recorded. It is imperative that this recommendation be introduced to protect the rights of both the suspect and members of the Garda Síochána. Suspects should also have a right to receive legal advice on the provision of a bodily sample.

The Bill amends the Criminal Justice (Forensic Evidence) Act 1990. It proposes, for example, to increase the defined period for the holding of a sample from six to 12 months and allow for mouth swabs and saliva samples to be taken without consent. These proposals deserve careful scrutiny because the need to impose such requirements will progressively decline in the coming years owing to continuing technological advances in the area of genetic DNA amplication. Cheek swabs, for instance, will no longer be necessary. As such, the new provision must be subject to ongoing review. Other legislation includes provision for an annual or biennial review of its provisions. This legislation should also provide for such review, given that oral samples will no longer be necessary in a few years because hair samples will be sufficient to carry out DNA analysis.

The Minister has indicated he may introduce regulations to provide for the manner in which samples are taken, their location, physical conditions etc. It is imperative that he change the word "may" to "shall" because specific, detailed regulations on how samples are to be taken are essential. However, no such regulations should be introduced before the House takes a positive decision on the matter. I hope the Minister will accede to my request as it would provide the checks and balances the legislation requires.

The Bill also provides for the Garda Síochána to use so-called "reasonable force" but does not define the term. This principle should be clarified for the sake of suspects and gardaí who need to know the precise circumstances under which force can be used and what type of force can be used. The level of force used should be commensurate with the scale of the offence about which a suspect is being questioned.

As I stated, we need to protect suspects, gardaí and any other persons present when a DNA sample is taken. The Law Reform Commission has pointed out the practical difficulties associated with using reasonable force to obtain a mouth swab. It notes, for example, that while this power exists in the UK, it is considered dangerous not only for the person seeking to obtain the sample because he or she may be bitten by the suspect but also for the individual from whom the sample is being obtained as the procedure may cause injury. I hope appropriate and significant amendments will be made to the relevant section of the Bill before it is enacted.

With regard to section 30 on firearms storage, approximately 200,000 ordinary, decent people hold gun licences. The inclusion in a criminal justice Bill of provisions covering legally held firearms creates an impression that the holders of such arms are considered criminals. It is wrong to introduce provisions on gun licensing for sporting purposes in criminal justice legislation. Garda statistics show that the illegal use of firearms by licensed gun holders is not a significant problem. The Minister must revisit this section for a number of reasons. He received an extensive submission from the National Association of Regional Game Councils, the representative body of those involved in the legitimate sport of shooting. Its members should not be criminalised by including them in this legislation.

Sensible firearms policies are necessary but this requires modernisation of the 1925 Act. Regulations should be introduced on the storage of guns by tourists. Deputy Jim O'Keeffe, in his contribution on Second Stage earlier in the year, referred to tourists locking guns into the boots of cars, a dangerous practice which is ignored in the Bill. Firearms legislation must address specific firearms issues which should not be dealt with in general criminal justice legislation. The majority of licensed gun holders are decent, law-abiding citizens and the inclusion of section 30 unfairly labels them.

All public representatives are occasionally approached by individuals who have been refused a gun licence without grounds being given by the Garda. As my colleague, Deputy Jim O'Keeffe, noted, the Garda Síochána sometimes receives soft intelligence on specific individuals and this forms the basis of its refusal to issue a gun licence. However, such intelligence does not feature in the majority of refusals. Those refused licences or renewals should be given reasons for the decision and a right of appeal should be enshrined in the legislation to allow a second opinion to be obtained. The area of firearms licences is in need of reform but this should be done in specific firearms legislation rather criminal justice legislation.

Every speaker so far has raised the issue of anti-social behaviour. The Minister has discussed the matter outside the House and promised to introduce legislation to deal with it, including anti-social behaviour orders which every Fianna Fáil backbench Deputy who speaks today will say is the solution. He devoted just one sentence to the issue in his contribution. We do not know the detail of the provisions about which the Minister is talking and it is about time he started outlining them. He can define it whatever way he likes and call it what he likes, but it is a significant problem in many communities. People are sick and tired of new legislation with little action and enforcement subsequently. Without giving the resources to the Garda it is pointless enacting more legislation. We still have not seen the 2,000 extra Garda — another hollow commitment by the Government before the last general election. The reality, with which we deal on a daily basis, is that communities cannot get gardaí. There is need for a complete overhaul, both of the recruitment and retention of gardaí within the force to address the issue and of garda rostering.

For example on a Saturday night in the town of Athlone which has a massive catchment area throughout the midlands, five gardaí are on duty. Of those five gardaí, two could be called out to a road traffic accident leaving three gardaí in the town of Athlone and its catchment area. There could be a disturbance abroad in Glasson and two gardaí would have to go out to that. The town of Athlone would then be policed by one member of the Garda Síochána. If there is a report of a domestic violence incident, two returning gardaí must go to that. How can they police our streets when the Minister is not giving basic resources to the Garda to police them at the times they are needed, at weekends and at night when there are difficulties? The rostering system does not facilitate that. Over the past eight years in which this and the previous Government have been in office, they have closed down the rural Garda stations. One Garda station close to my home is open for one hour a month. That is supposed to be a rural Garda station. That is not rural policing. The individuals in that community do not know their local garda.

We need to look at many of the issues. They do not require legislation. They require resources. They require political commitment and sadly that is not there. There is the farcical position on PULSE. Only one in four Garda stations operates PULSE. Gardaí are travelling 20 or 30 miles to input data into PULSE and returning to their base. That is not a proper use of Garda resources.

The Minister still has gardaí in clerical posts throughout the country when they should be out on the streets enforcing the laws we pass in this House. Garda time is being consistently wasted and the Minister is doing nothing about it. All he is talking about is bringing in ever more legislation without giving the Garda the resources, manpower and structures to facilitate it.

The communications system used by the Garda Síochána is also farcical. Gardaí who want to use a secure method of communication must use their personal mobile telephones.

Planning is another issue causing considerable problems and it will continue to cause problems. It is consistently ignored in addressing the issue of anti-social behaviour on which it has a significant impact. I am lucky enough to have come across the problems with planning, seen the plans at first hand and spoken with planners about planning. There are green areas not overlooked by houses and alleyways without public lighting not visible from any home. Such areas facilitate anti-social behaviour. That type of planning should not be accepted in this day and age. We should have learned from the planning mistakes over the past 20 or 30 years. Local authorities are trying to resolve those problems in housing estates while consistently planners are approving housing developments which facilitate and promote anti-social behaviour. There is a role for the local Garda superintendent in looking at the plans and advising the local authority on addressing such issues by stating, for example, that if a green area will cause more trouble rather than facilitate the community, it would be better incorporated into the adjoining property of a householder rather than leaving it as a green area merely to meet the conditions laid down in the planning laws that a certain percentage of land must be left open as a green area.

Although there are many aspects of anti-social behaviour that I wanted to raise, one particular issue is the probation and welfare service. It is a significantly under resourced asset which needs to be strengthened so that it can become a significant asset in addressing anti-social behaviour and many other petty crime issues. Sadly we regularly see young people over the age of 18 going into the prison system. We see juveniles from many parts of the country going into Trinity House and other facilities in Dublin. Such places are a breeding ground not only for anti-social behaviour but for criminal activity. If the Minister properly resourced the probation and welfare service he would keep many young people out of the prison system in the first instance. Many young people would learn a great deal more from taking up a yard brush and daily sweeping an estate where they have caused specific problems with anti-social behaviour, both from the point of view of humiliation and hard labour. That could resolve many of the problems of re-offending in anti-social behaviour. It would be preferable to putting people into the criminal justice system where one will not solve any problem but will cause problems for the future.

There have been a number of campaigns on drink-driving, speeding and insurance fraud. We need a public awareness campaign on anti-social behaviour. I have spoken to young people, some of whom have been involved in anti-social behaviour. Many are not aware of the impact their anti-social behaviour is having on older people and the wider community. We need to look at that element. We have many avenues of communications available to us. We should use them.

See this speech in context