Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

I support the amendments on the basis that in some ways I do not believe the Minister will be satisfied with the technical accuracy of the technology. I am opposed to tagging of people on bail, as I opposed the tagging of released prisoners as a system for keeping track of people who have been convicted. Greater investment in the probation and welfare system would probably serve much better those who have been convicted and it would be more cost effective. I argued that matter when this was being discussed in the previous Bill. We argued against going beyond that, as did the Minister. Several months later, however, he is presenting proposals to the House on something he has argued against and about which he had major concerns last year. I do not see what has happened in the meantime to change his or anybody else's mind in that regard.

I find it strange that my amendments were ruled out of order as being contrary to the purpose of the Bill. My intention was to ensure that if this Bill, as enacted, was to come into operation, it would be conditional on the proposals I tabled in those amendments. This amendment also has an element of conditionality attached and yet it was accepted so that is bizarre. The conditionalities I mentioned are reasonable and if the Minister is open to accepting or debating reasonable amendments, he should look at them, despite their being ruled out of order, and perhaps consider taking them on board for Report Stage. We have passed several laws since I became a Member of the House, which I believe were retrograde. They have not been operational for a sufficient length of time for us to be able to form an opinion as to their effectiveness, yet the Minister is extending some of those provisions in this legislation. At the outset, we should see whether previous legislation is being used and is effective. If it is not effective, we should look at it. I do not believe that most of the provisions passed last year under the Criminal Justice Act have been used. The Minister might present the evidence he has in support of his position to the House so that we may, on the basis of some facts and figures, decide on the way forward.

I outlined on Second Stage my virtual total opposition to this Bill. There are some slight parts that I accept, but in total this is not the way forward. If the Minister wishes to tackle gangland and drugs related crime head on, he would do much better to ensure that members of the Garda Síochána can communicate with each other by radio rather than personal telephones. They should have access to the Internet at each station and stations should be of a proper habitable quality. Rooms, including interrogation centres in stations, should be fully equipped and operational for video recording.

There should be a greater presence of community gardaí. There is a problem within the Garda, because it is difficult to get serving officers to remain as community gardaí as it is not considered sexy enough or whatever. That culture within the Garda Síochána needs to change because one of the most effective ways of tackling crime is to increase public confidence in the Garda and to promote greater interaction with gardaí in the community. Enormous strides have been made in this regard. Community gardaí have worked very well, for example, in Cherry Orchard, on the development council etc. In time the reward for this type of work will come. It might not come quickly enough for the Minister, nor, regrettably, for some of the victims of crime, but it is coming because there is a slight change in the manner in which the Garda Síochána is tackling the problem.

If the Minister was listening to the Garda and read Garda Review, a copy of which I got yesterday, time and again the call is there for more resources and equipment, but not necessarily more laws. The laws are there to be used, but they cannot be used because gardaí cannot get past the first stage, which is about communicating with each other and perhaps the public. At this stage, on section 1 in particular, I ask the Minister to look at my amendments, even though they have been ruled out of order. These amendments propose that some of these sections, such as the treatment of persons in Garda custody, do not come into effect until the regulations are independently reviewed. A similar needs analysis must be done of different parts of the justice system. For instance, no needs analysis has been done of An Garda Síochána although Kathleen O'Toole has begun one.

See this speech in context