Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)

Is Bille an-thábhachtach é an Bille seo. Tá an Freasúra go mór i bhfábhar an Bille ó thaobh an bhun prionsabal atá ann. Tá sé tábhachtach nuair a dhéanann daoine dúnmharuithe ar bóithre agus sráideanna Bhaile Átha Cliath, Luimneach agus áiteanna eile go dtagann an dlí iomlán aniar aduaidh orthu. Tá sé tábhachtach go mbeireann muid orthu aon slí gur féidir linn agus go dtugann muid aon fhianaise gur féidir linn a thabhairt i gcúirteanna na tíre. Mar sin, táimid go mór i bhfábhar bun prionsabail an Bhille seo agus ní bheidh aon trioblóid ag an Rialtas ón Fhreasúra ina thaobh. Tá rudaí áirithe sa Bhille gur féidir a neartú agus is féidir linn plé a dhéanamh ar cúpla ceist bunúsach agus díospóireacht a dhéanamh orthu ar Chéim an Choiste.

Is rud tábhachtach é go bhfuil cead ag éinne a bhfuil ainmnithe dul isteach i teach nó áit chun "bugs" a chur isteach. Luaitear sa Bhille na daoine seo, mar shampla, duine atá san Airm, gardaí agus daoine atá ag obair sa Revenue Commissioners. Tá ceist bhunúsach agam i dtaobh seo. Beidh na daoine seo ag dul isteach in áiteanna ina bhfuil daoine uafásacha, daoine atá tar éis dúnmharú a dhéanamh, daoine atá ag pleanáil robálacha agus daoine atá baint leo le drugaí. Tá sé an-thábachtach mar sin go mbeidh na daoine atá ag dul isteach sna háiteanna seo sábháilte agus nach marófar iad. Is riachtanas bunúsach é sin.

Mar a dúirt an Teachta Michael Noonan sa ráiteas a chuir sé amach anocht, tá seans ann go rachaidh daoine atá ag obair do private security firms isteach in áiteanna mar seo. B'fhéidir go mbeidh duine mar seo under contract with the service commission agus ag dul isteach in áit mar sin. Seans go mbeidh an duine sin i dainséar mór pearsanta. Mar sin, tá sé thar a bheith riachtanach go mbeidh gardaí in éineacht le aon duine a théann isteach. Chun na fírinne a rá, níl a fhios agam cén fáth nach dtugtar an chumhacht sin san iomlán do ghardaí. Ní fios cad a tharlóidh má théann aon duine eile isteach in áit mar sin, mar tá dainséar mór ann dóibh mar go bhfuil daoine a ndearna dúnmharú sna tithe sin agus tá dainséar ann go marófar na daoine a théann isteach. I mo thuairim, tá sé tábhachtach níos mó béime a chur ar an sórt duine a rachaidh isteach in áiteanna mar seo. Measaim go mba cóir gur gardaí armtha a rachadh isteach, mar ní fios cad a tharlóidh.

While we on the Opposition side welcome the Bill and support it in principle, we have no doubt about the certainty that must be required in terms of evidence in the courts. We have no doubt that all new technologies, including those which are yet to be implemented, should be used to deal with people who may be about to commit crimes involving a sentence of at least five years in jail. We are talking about serious offences with significant jail sentences.

I must mention, in the most constructive way, that the powers in the Bill allow at least three categories of people to plant the evidence——I am sorry; I did not mean to say "plant the evidence" but "plant the bug to get the evidence". I thought I was in Fianna Fáil for a minute. I am sorry — I was only joking.

The three categories of people who can break in to plant devices are gardaí, Army officers and Revenue officials. As they are going into places that are occupied, owned or frequented by highly dangerous, evil people — some of whom, as we know, have murdered people in cold blood on the streets of Dublin and Limerick — I am concerned about the safety of these officers. Some of the powers apply in extremis; in other words, if I am a Revenue official and believe that a serious crime is about to be committed, I must carry out this operation now, as I do not have time to go to court. In that case the person carrying out the operation is in extreme danger if he or she is not physically protected. There may be nobody there when he or she goes into the room or building; but that is not to say the people involved will not come thundering over in five or ten minutes, and if they find the person with evidence of bugging, they may treat him or her very aggressively.

Thus, I am concerned about the different categories of people who will have these powers. It should always be an armed garda or a garda with armed backup. We need that degree of certainty about the support the person will have while conducting the operation. I am not sure of the legal position but I do not know whether an Army officer can be armed in the State on his or her own. This should be considered and debated with the aim of protecting the individual who is carrying out the operation. A Revenue official would be in grave danger. The issue needs further reflection.

I understand the Bill allows covert surveillance for up to 72 hours without recourse to a court. I do not have a problem with allowing the designated officer — on Committee Stage we should be given clarity on who this will be and whether he or she will have armed support — to protect himself or herself, but there is currently no recourse to the courts to authorise the action being taken in extremis for a period of up to 72 hours. That time should be shortened. I do not see why any authorised officer, whoever that person may be, cannot resort to the courts in extreme circumstances. One should be able to approach a District Court judge within 24 hours. That is not unreasonable. Wherever possible, there should be due process. In other words, it should be done through the courts as soon as possible, wherever possible, in order to ensure there is absolute certainty as to the actions taken in an extreme and exceptional situation. I absolutely accept that such action may have to be taken. To be clear, I have no problem with these measures provided that the persons concerned are protected and the courts are involved as quickly as possible. As I said, 72 hours is excessive.

It is important to consider why people end up in these types of situation. In all our urban centres, there are young people being raised in homes where no parent is regularly present. These are the children who used to be called latchkey kids. Such people are at risk in their own homes because there is no person with whom they can identify who is on the side of the law and who can affirm to them the values, attitudes and beliefs shared by the majority of society. It is important that we address this issue in communities throughout the State in terms of support for families who are likely to end up in a situation of significant conflict, which may ultimately lead to the callous, brutal and evil behaviour we have seen recently.

Intervention at the earliest possible stage is vital and is what we must strive towards. As a former teacher, I dealt with students who were in trouble, some of them from very difficult family backgrounds. That is why I am able to deal with the Minister of State.

See this speech in context