Seán Kenny (Dublin North East, Labour)

I was a member of Dublin City Council up to six weeks ago so I will discuss the use of community service orders by local authorities and my city council in particular. I was a member of the joint policing committee of Dublin City Council and I am aware that sanctions are needed to deal with cases where people are involved in anti-social activity or crime. There is no getting away from that.

A former Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Michael McDowell, introduced a scheme to remove graffiti in Dublin through his Department, although unfortunately it was withdrawn in 2009 because of cuts. In 2008 alone in the council's north-central area - which I represented at the time - €250,000 was spent on removing graffiti. The withdrawal of the scheme in 2009 left a gap in the services provided to remove graffiti and the implementation of such a scheme through community service orders would be welcome. Currently, preparations are being made for the visit of the Queen of England to Dublin. Unfortunately, there is recent evidence of the daubing of graffiti in public areas by people opposing the visit. Extra resources must be put in place to stop this kind of activity.

Dublin City Council's public domain officers have told me there is a list of community projects which could be implemented through an expansion of the community service order scheme for the benefit of the community and the voluntary sector. There is plenty of capacity to utilise the scheme more efficiently in order to complete work in the voluntary community sector.

I can provide one or two examples of the kind of work has been done. The Stardust park in Coolock has been repainted recently. The railings in St. Anne's Park have been repainted. The local communities in these areas are appreciative of such work and of the effort that participants in the schemes have put in. They think it is a positive thing. There is also anecdotal evidence that dialogue sometimes takes place between the participants in the scheme and the youths who created the graffiti or litter in the first place, which can have the positive effect of ending the anti-social activity.

I am aware there have been some objections to works carried out under the scheme, mainly from painting contractors and so on. However, we must bear in mind that the type of work carried out under the scheme is in the community and voluntary sector; it is work that would not otherwise be done. I do not think it can be argued that it is doing anyone out of a job. It must also be said that local authorities often provide many of the materials used in the schemes, so there is little cost to the community and voluntary sector, which is the main beneficiary of this work. I welcome the Bill.

See this speech in context