Seymour Crawford (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this legislation. As my colleague, Deputy Jim O'Keeffe, said at the outset, it has taken some time to bring it to the House. One cannot but point to the case to which Deputy Boyle referred. I have listened to the radio debate and it is clear how difficult it is for some people to agree on how particular incidents should be dealt with. This is a case where a man lost his life in circumstances where the person responsible for his death was living in fear and dread. The argument can be made that the latter was not absolutely aware of the seriousness of his actions. This is a case that may come back before the courts so one must be careful in speaking about it.

We see clearly in the media that people have different views on this case. It comes back to an issue discussed in the House many times. We can have all the law we like, but we do not have the troops on the ground to implement it. There is not a sufficient number of gardaí among the people. There were supposed to be 2,000 additional gardaí but there are only 300. Far worse, hundreds of gardaí are stuck behind desks in work which could be done by civilians. People in rural areas, particularly Border areas such as where I am from, live in fear because the Garda personnel are not available to deal with occurrences. Those people do not have the full support of the nation of which we are all proud, particularly when we have so much money. It is serious when that money is not used properly to allow people to live and have security in their own homes. I do not condone anyone taking the law into his or her own hands. Those living in isolated areas know there is no hope of support if they call 999, a fear that must be understood.

I admit I often read the explanatory memorandum rather than the Bill because the spokesman on justice is the one who should go through the legal technicalities. The explanatory memorandum states: "With the development of modern psychiatry and greater understanding of the underlying causes of mental illness and its associated conditions, it has become apparent that this area of the criminal law needs clarification and development." That sentence made my blood boil. Today, there are more suicides than ever, with more people under pressure.

On umpteen occasions, I have dealt with individuals in my constituency office after they were refused psychiatric service support and access to full-time treatment, even in the short term. In one case, an individual committed suicide only five days after being refused. To suggest psychiatric services have improved is ridiculous. We now spend less money on the treatment of mental illnesses than when times were bad, yet there are more suicides than ever. When such statements as the one I quoted are written, we must ensure we know what we are talking about.

If one attends the funerals of those who die as a direct or indirect result of insanity, one realises we are not dealing properly with this problem. We may have a more modern way of dealing with mental illnesses and fewer people may be committed, but there are cases such as that of Fred Williamson. His cousin was buried last Saturday, almost a year after his death. She was a handicapped child who depended on Freddie. However, their matter was allowed drag on when support or treatment would have solved their problems. I feel very emotional about this issue as they were good neighbours of mine. While that case may not be relevant to the Bill, the way in which people are treated is relevant. Some cases involving individuals with mental illnesses do not end up in the courts.

I accept there are people who are insane and not fit to be tried. We need services that can decide whether an individual is genuinely insane. One can never forget the victims such as in the case of Annie Gillespie and her daughter who died in Sligo as a result of Mr. Gallagher's actions. I recall canvassing in County Mayo, during what is now known as the Ring by-election, when one could not go to houses at night because a young priest, a mother and her child had been murdered in a nearby locality. Once 9 p.m. came, we stopped canvassing because people were scared. Again, in this case, the individual who perpetrated the crimes was insane.

Such people must be locked up and properly controlled to ensure they never carry out the same actions again. There have been instances of murders and serious crimes committed by former inmates of psychiatric institutions or those released from the Central Mental Hospital. It is important for the public to be aware of this side of the coin to ensure, as far as is possible, proper balance is achieved between dealing with someone who has committed a crime while psychiatrically ill and the protection of the public from further crimes. Whatever regulations are made, we must not only protect the rights of an insane individual and have him or her housed in a proper institution rather than a jail, we must also ensure he or she serves the time for the crime committed.

There is an issue around the judgment of diminished responsibility. While I agree with the Bill as presented, there is a need to change some of its language to bring it into line with modern thinking. While the laws must be changed, the manpower also must be provided to ensure people feel safe in their homes. We must also ensure individuals with insanity problems are controlled as far as possible.

See this speech in context