Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

Gabhaim buíochas as an deis labhairt ar an Bhille seo. Tá sé cosúil leis an Bhille a cuireadh os ár gcomhair anseo mí Mheithimh 2006, Bille a chuir an Teachta Jim O'Keeffe os comhair an Tí. Ag an am chuir mé ina choinne agus is oth liom a rá arís go mbeidh mé ag cur i gcoinne an Bhille seo de thairbhe nach bhfuil smaoineamh déanta ar an méid atá Fine Gael ag iarraidh a chur trasna sa Bhille um an Dlí Coiriúil (Cosaint Tí Cónaithe) 2009. Tá i bhfad níos mó smaoinimh le déanamh ar an cheist seo go mbeimid in ann teacht suas le Bille a chuirfidh san áireamh go díreach na ceisteanna móra atá na Teachtaithe a chuir an Bille seo os ár gcomhair ag triall a chur trasna.

As I said in 2006 when discussing the home defence Bill presented by Deputy Jim O'Keeffe, the law must always seek to strike a balance between the rights of victims and those of alleged criminals. We must never forget that the premise which fundamentally underlines our justice system is the presumption of innocence until a person is proven guilty. The problem with this Bill is that it sends out the message to householders that they should act as judge, jury and executioner, albeit it does not allow for a defence to murder. It seems to suggest that any person who is found on another's property, whether guilty or not of the crime of trespass, may reasonably be subject to punishment by a kicking or worse.

Deputy Tuffy made an important point regarding the definition of trespass. There are many cases in which a trespasser does not have malicious intent. For example, a trespasser could be a family member who disputes the ownership of a land or property in a case of probate and wishes to assert his or her perceived rights. The trespasser may be a squatter who does not pose a threat to the occupier because the latter may not have been at home when he or she moved in to a premises. An improved definition of the word "trespasser" is, therefore, required.

The Bill is obviously intended to address circumstances in which a person is trespassing with intent to do damage or injure. Increasing levels of violence are being perpetrated by burglars in homes across the country, whether in isolated rural areas or urban centres. A significant number of elderly people in a particular part of my constituency have had their homes broken into. Thankfully in the cases with which I am familiar, none of the victims was assaulted, although they had the fear of God put into them by these burglaries and have been left afraid to continue living alone. This is one of the serious consequences of break-ins. It is bad enough to lose valuable property or a family heirloom. What is worse, however, is that victims often become afraid to continue living in their home.

In one recent case, the victim of a break-in, a woman who had lost her husband the previous year, was so traumatised that her family found it necessary to move her to a nursing home. Victim impact statements need to be used against criminals involved in break-ins to ensure they understand the full consequences of their actions and judges must take into account the impact of burglaries on old and vulnerable people. The impact of a break-in extends beyond a window being broken to gain access or a watch or wad of money being robbed.

The number of robberies is increasing as a consequence of the recession and increasing prevalence of drugs. Drug addicts use robberies as a tactic to obtain money to feed their drug habits. With burglars becoming more violent and ruthless, it is vital that such criminals be subject to the full rigours of the law when arrested and brought before the courts.

The danger with this type of legislation is that it encourages what are known as "have-a-go heroes", including people who may not be able to stand up to intruders, to come downstairs wielding an implement, with the result that a violent confrontation ensues. The proper response should be to call the Garda Síochána. This would be possible if the Garda was properly resourced but the problem, especially in rural areas, is that more and more local Garda stations are empty at nights, weekends and in some cases during the week. Moreover, Garda equipment is not up to scratch, for example, the promised digital radio system has still not been rolled out. We also need more gardaí to be released from duties that could be undertaken by civilians. A recent media report indicated that we have failed to meet the target for civilianisation, a process which would release more gardaí to engage in duties such as responding quickly and effectively to alarm calls made by people who believe their homes are under attack by burglars. As other Deputies have noted, greater investment is required in security for the elderly and those living in isolated areas to discourage attempts to break in to their homes.

We need to take a cautious approach to legislation of this nature and understand what would be the consequences of its enactment. One of the key dangers is that the Bill would increase conflict and violence during break-ins. One woman informed me that she woke up to find a person she did not know staring down at her. Not understanding the consequences of her actions, she screamed out and a hand was place over her face. If this legislation had been in force at that time, the woman in question may have had a knife or other weapon concealed under her pillow and may have used it to lash out at the intruder. She would then have had to face the consequences of her actions. The Bill does not provide a basis for mounting a defence in the case of murder, although in the case of a woman who lashes out with a knife and kills an intruder, the offence would probably be manslaughter. Nevertheless, taking an implement such as a knife upstairs implies premeditation and an intention to use it. The outworkings and consequences of this scenario have not been adequately addressed.

This three page Bill does not do justice to the issue involved. I encourage the Fine Gael Party Deputies to go back to the drawing board and consider the recommendations of the Law Reform Commission when it reports to determine whether it is possible to address some of the problems I and others have identified. On that basis, a Bill could be introduced to protect victims, while leaving intact the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, one of the cornerstones of our justice system.

See this speech in context