Seán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein)

My Sinn Féin colleague, Deputy Ó Snodaigh, has outlined our party's concerns about the provisions of this Bill as published. He spoke specifically about the proposals to extend significantly the powers of the Garda, including the proposal to extend the period of detention to up to 24 hours. Further proposed new powers include the power of compulsion of bodily samples without consent and powers to issue search warrants. The Deputy also spoke about the Irish Human Rights Commission's advice that the Minister's proposals may violate constitutional rights, as well as EU and international law. He confirmed that while Sinn Féin supports measures which are tough on crime, it cannot support the Bill before the House, as outlined.

Many communities are wondering whether the Garda needs to be given more powers. They believe that more effective and strategic deployment of Garda resources is needed. Garda reform is necessary to ensure gardaí are made accountable to the communities they serve. In other words, the Garda's present powers need to be put to better use and more resources need to be devoted to crime. Legislation seems to be introduced every year with the aim of resolving the crime problems which are found in certain communities. We were told that previous Bills would stop young people from drinking in fields, hanging around or becoming involved in anti-social behaviour. The reality for many communities, certainly the communities I represent, is that this problem continues. People still live in fear in their own communities.

On Monday next, a childhood development initiative will be launched in the Jobstown area of Tallaght. A previous report was based on interviews with young children from many of the estates in the area. The children were asked what issues needed to be addressed by society, Government and local politicians. One of the major issues for the young children was security. They talked in terms of bullying at school and so on, but also about security in their homes and their fears of living on their estates. Not a weekend goes by when I do not get a telephone call from a person living in terror in his or her home, and other public representatives in the area get similar calls. People are crying out for help. They say they have tried to contact gardaí or others but no-one responds while gangs are attacking their homes and property. They are living in fear. I do not know how many families have visited my advice clinics to look for help and told me they want to move out of the area because they are terrified. These are people who, in many cases, have lived 20 and 30 years in their community but they say they have never known it as bad as it is now. The Bill before us will not resolve the situation for those families.

We need more resources devoted to crime prevention and targeted at disadvantaged areas, as recommended by the National Crime Council and demanded by Sinn Féin. Why would we dispute that disadvantaged areas should be targeted and given that support? These areas are in the front line for attacks. As a society, we should pull together with decent people living in the communities faced with these attacks, which take place particularly at weekends but also during the week.

Last month the Minister casually presented proposals for additions to the Criminal Justice Bill which would change the Bill beyond recognition. On behalf of my party I object to the Minister's modus operandi of publishing and debating one Bill on Second Stage before introducing a raft of controversial amendments on Committee Stage that never see proper debate in this House. What comes back from committee is effectively a totally different Bill. The effect is to suppress debate on controversial issues of public interest. This is the typical demagoguery we have come to expect from this Minister. It is not acceptable democratic practice and the Taoiseach should rein in the Minister.

I want to address a number of the proposed amendments. I will begin with the Minister's proposal to bring the notorious anti-social behaviour orders to this jurisdiction. Sinn Féin has challenged anti-social behaviour in our communities for many years. We recognise it as a significant problem. Our communities deserve solutions that work, not the pre-election gimmicks offered by the Minister, Deputy McDowell. The Minister is determined to convince us that his ASBOs are radically different to those used in Britain but this is simply not the case. While the duration of the order and the maximum prison sentence for its breach are less than in Britain, it should be remembered that the consequences of a criminal conviction for the individual are lifelong. Like the British ASBOs, because it will be a civil order, the onus of proof and hence assumption of innocence unless proven guilty is not safeguarded in the same manner as in a criminal trial. When imprisonment results from breach of an ASBO for non-criminal behaviour, the effect is the denial of the right to a fair trial. In this regard the Minister's proposals and British ASBOs are the same.

ASBOs are wrong. Their use involves a denial of human rights under international law and the European Convention on Human Rights. Furthermore, anti-social behaviour orders do not work. After more than six years of implementation in Britain, there is no evidence ASBOs have reduced much less eliminated anti-social behaviour. According to Home Office figures published in March the breach rate is over 40%. Even the Garda Representative Association opposes their implementation here.

I am not speaking off the top of my head. I have travelled to Britain to talk to many of the communities affected by anti-social behaviour. We are all seeking genuine solutions to this growing phenomenon, not only in Ireland but abroad also. Most of the behaviour we call "anti-social" is actually criminal behaviour. Criminal behaviour should result in criminal charges and prosecution. We need to enforce the existing law. In England, I have seen photographs of children posted in local centres and medical centres with messages such as "If you have seen this person, contact... ". Given my long experience with the problems of young people involved in anti-social and criminal behaviour, I am uncomfortable with the idea of "wanted" notices in community centres and medical centres.

The legislation is already in place to deal with anti-social behaviour. For example, the Public Order Act 1994 allows the Garda to arrest and charge people for intoxication in a public place, disorderly conduct in a public place, threatening, abusive or intimidating behaviour in a public place, or failure to comply with a Garda direction. We were told the Act would resolve the situation with regard to young people gathering on green spaces and so on. We were given all sorts of commitments by all sorts of Ministers and other politicians, who said this would resolve the problems faced by communities. I remember the debate on the original Bill. At the time, I did not believe it would solve the problem because whether legislation was put in place, I was not sure the will existed to act on the legislation.

The problem is widespread, not just in urban but in rural areas, and the same message comes from people living in rural areas. However, we do not have the resources to tackle the problem. When politicians are contacted by constituents and telephone a Garda station, they are told the resources are not available. I have shared platforms with colleagues from my party and other parties in trying to address this issue. In my constituency there is general agreement between Sinn Féin, Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, the PDs, the Labour Party and all the parties active in that area. The common view is that there are not enough Garda resources in the constituency. If gardaí are asked whether they can get a car to an area where a woman or a family is living in terror, or where there are gangs outside a house, off the record the gardaí will say they do not have the resources or that they have sent a car but the crowd is too large for the gardaí to deal with. I have witnessed situations when two gardaí have gone to an incident but have been assaulted by gangs outside residents' houses. The will exists on the part of many gardaí but the resources are not in place, unfortunately.

Sinn Féin has called meetings of local estate management groups and tried to involve the local community — the people affected — and the local gardaí. I remember one meeting in my constituency attended by an inspector, a sergeant, a number of community gardaí, the usual politicians and members of the community at which a breeze block was thrown through the window of the car owned by a Labour Party councillor and it was robbed. On the night of another meeting, a car was set on fire because the local gurriers in the area knew we were trying to resolve the problems the community faced.

In that same community where those attacks occurred, I dealt with a woman who was myopic and who lived on her own. Her son who was going to college was forced out of the house. He was attacked going into the house because he was seen as odd that he was going to college. That woman's house was attacked for three days. Tiles were missing from her roof following those attacks. She was terrified in her home. That is just one example.

Down the road another woman's children were constantly attacked. She felt it would be safer for the children to live in Israel rather than in that estate, and this was at the time of the suicide bombings there. It shames me as a local representative from that area and as an Irish citizen that someone should have to go through that. I could bring anyone to the area to talk to people who will go through their stories. I do not believe my area is very different from anyone else's although perhaps I can articulate more extreme cases. Every Member of this House has a story to tell about the failure of our society to support people who are vulnerable in their communities.

As has been highlighted by the Coalition Against ASBOs, these orders violate the principle of diversion of children from the criminal justice system and are contrary to the Children Act and the International Convention on the Rights of the Child. The Children Act contains many provisions which involve alternatives to deal with anti-social and other criminal behaviour by young people. However, the Minister has refused to activate parts of the Act or to give it enough resources to work.

The last thing one wants is young people getting into the criminal justice system by going to jail or whatever. There are alternatives, including a number of pilot schemes to try to keep young people out of the criminal justice system. In my area, the probation and welfare service runs such schemes. When one of the groups applied to the Minister to expand a programme which was working, keeping young people out of the criminal justice system and turning them around, it was told money was not available for this type of pilot scheme even though it had been in place for eight or nine years in that area. The general consensus among certain politicians, gardaí and the probation and welfare service was that it was working but resources were not available.

ASBOs will do nothing to address the root causes of anti-social behaviour such as drug and alcohol misuse, mental health problems, lack of proper parenting or family or other support and lack of community recreational and youth facilities. Sinn Féin proposes other options which will be more effective if given the chance and the proper resources. These include better community policing to deter and enforce existing law, which makes sense; more resources to enhance community supervision by the probation and welfare service — I gave an example in my community; full implementation of the provisions of the Children Act 2001, including youth diversion programmes, conferencing options, community sanctions and parental sanctions; and community restorative justice alternatives to imprisonment or fines for adults engaged in anti-social behaviour. A group in my area is active in respect of restorative justice. It has worked to a large extent in the North. It places the onus on those involved in criminal and anti-social behaviour to change their behaviour. It is an example of the community coming together and it is an area which has received little attention in the fight against crime in the community and in the support of gardaí.

Other proposals include a community mediation service for conflict resolution, such as that which operates in Norway, where the behaviour involved is disruptive and offence but not criminal; and more resources for mental health care, addiction treatment, social services and investment in community infrastructure in disadvantaged areas, including recreational and youth facilities.

The infrastructure is in place in many areas but the policy was to close many of those centres because many schemes in which people were involved were being disbanded. I welcome the fact there seems to be a change in that regard. Hopefully, those community facilities will continue to engage and involve more young people. Getting young people off the streets can help to avoid many of the problems in which young people get involved. I have examples from my area where community facilities for young people are open until 12 midnight or 12.30 a.m. There is also a drop-in centre for young people. We must get young people off the streets and street corners and get them involved in positive activity and interaction with adults and their peers. Education also has a part to play, for example, providing young people with computer facilities.

The next important issue is the Minister's proposal to lower the age of criminal responsibility by two years to ten years of age. Employing twisted logic, the Minister argues he is raising the age of criminal responsibility by three years but that is not the case. The Children Act makes provision for the age of criminal responsibility to be 12 years and this commitment must be implemented and not discarded.

As regards the Minister's other proposals, including a drug offenders' register, mandatory minimum sentences and electronic monitoring, I do not believe he has demonstrated the need for certain measures or that they are based on a sound examination of costs and social outcomes of similar measures in other jurisdictions. A number of his other proposals also pose a threat to fundamental civil liberties.

I reiterate my party's frustration at the Minister's anti-democratic habit of transforming Bills on a whim midway through the legislative process.

See this speech in context