Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)

I do not want to get into a protracted debate on mandatory sentences for drug offences. I am strongly of the view that there should be a general tariff of ten years for serious drug trafficking offences. As I said at the Association of Garda Sergeants and Inspectors conference, I strongly believe that a sentence of seven and half years, taking account of standard remission, should be the norm for persons convicted of a serious offence. This seems so obvious to me that I do not know who disagrees with it as a proposition.

There are some who contend that drug mules and the smaller cogs in the machine should not be dealt with as though they are Mr. Big. However, Mr. Big requires the mules to operate in this manner. I do not like commenting on individual cases but I notice a particular judge made this point recently when he observed that if the smaller cogs did not participate in this activity, the Mr. Bigs could not do their business. This judge gave the defendant in question a ten-year sentence.

The constitutionally required escape clauses are in place. The reformulation of these provisions is necessary to state clearly the policy of this House, which is that, save in these entirely exceptional and specific circumstances, a person convicted of carrying drugs of a commercial quantity can expect to serve seven and a half years in prison on foot of a ten-year sentence. I do not know what is strange or controversial about this proposition.

I do not like being prescriptive. I recently made a speech in King's Inns in which I said I do not go for an absolutely rigid tariff. However, drug trafficking has such a horrific effect on Irish society and causes so many innocent people to lose their lives either through drug abuse or the activities of drug pushers that a sentence of seven and a half years for those who play a significant part in the entire operation is a reasonable deterrent. It is the type of sentence that public confidence in the administration of criminal justice requires. Save in circumstances on which I will not comment, lesser sentences subvert public confidence in the rule of law. That is the reality.

It has been pointed out in this House on many occasions that we do not have a rigid United States-style mandatory offence regime. There is an escape hatch from the norm for the Judiciary. The issue we must confront is whether we are entitled to have such a norm in place. Alternatively, is there some view of society we are collectively missing whereby lighter sentences should be the order of the day? I do not accept that the great majority of Irish people agree with this proposition. In this respect, it is not a question of the Legislature trespassing on the independence of the Judiciary.

It is a Legislature trying to establish a viable workable criminal law that brings home to the Irish people, potential criminals and people to observe the criminal justice system from outside that a ten-year sentence, which means seven and a half years in effect, is to be imposed in all except the most exceptional and specific cases as the sentence which a commercial level drug trafficker can expect to receive when he or she goes before an Irish court. That is a simple proposition and 90% of Irish people think that is right.

See this speech in context