John Browne (Wexford, Fianna Fail)

I will share my time with Deputy Seamus Kirk. I welcome the Criminal Justice Bill, compliment the Minister on its early introduction and wish him well in his ministry. It is not an easy ministry, but I am sure the Minister will acquit himself well. I am sure the Minister will acknowledge the previous Minister, Dermot Ahern, undertook to implement this Bill before leaving Government and had prepared a text for the Bill and that many of his ideas are now part and parcel of this Bill. What is important is that the Bill is before the House and that it will deal with white collar crime once and for all. The public perception is that the people who commit white collar crime are treated far more leniently by the law than any other sector of society and people feel that a blind eye is turned to white collar crime and it is more or less ignored. white collar crime is as much a crime as all other crime.

During the recent general election campaign, issues such as the public sector pay cuts, the minimum wage and the universal social charge were raised on the doorsteps. However, a question asked on every doorstep was when people would see action against Anglo Irish Bank, bankers, regulators, legal eagles, accountants, mortgage brokers and politicians who, allegedly, were involved in the collapse of the banking system. The public is as mad as hell that high fliers from the banking world are to be seen swanning around Europe and American, holidaying in their villas and mansions, while no action has been seen to be taken against them. We all accept that the wheels of the law move slowly but surely the investigation should move forward with greater urgency.

We had a situation recently where both Mr. Justice Peter Kelly and Mr. Justice Frank Clarke commented on the pace of such investigations. I accept the Anglo Irish Bank investigation is probably the largest ever in the history of this country but with the manpower and modern technology available to our justice system, it should be possible to expedite the investigation and ensure that justice is done. The public will accept nothing less.

We all accept the complexities of white collar crime. People involved in such crime are usually the privileged. They are well off and can employ top accountants and legal eagles to represent them and delay procedures against them. Hopefully, this Bill will deal with the issues which have caused such annoyance for the public and we will see those who commit white collar crime brought before the courts more quickly and dealt with accordingly. People have often remarked to me that people who commit a petty crime, such as stealing a tube of toothpaste from Dunnes Stores, are brought to court within a month, but it takes months to deal with people allegedly involved in white collar crime. I am glad the Bill contains a numbers of provisions, which will be examined further below, and which are related to the following key areas: detention for questioning; the requirement to make a statement; documentary evidence; legal privilege; and withholding information. In view of this it is laudable that the Bill is before us.

I wish to make a few points on detention for questioning. The existing law whereby a person may be detained for questioning by the Garda for a specified period will be amended to allow the period of detention to be broken into segments and the person released in the intervening periods. The Garda will be able to detain and question an individual for part of the period, release that person while the Garda makes further inquiries into what was said and then require the individual to return to the Garda station at a later stage for the continuation of his or her detention. Will there be adequate Garda manpower to carry out such detention for questioning? The extent of data and the complexity of recent investigations have shown that it is not always possible to complete questioning and check facts in one period of detention. A person recently asked me what safeguards the Bill will provide to ensure that a person will return and not abscond during his or her period of release and I ask the Minister to deal with that issue.

There has been reluctance for potential witnesses to make statements assisting the Garda in its current investigation. The Bill provides a mechanism whereby an obligation can be imposed on witnesses to provide information, answer questions and make statements on investigations into relevant offences. The Bill provides for applications to the District Court by the Garda Síochána for orders requiring the production of material or the provision of information, which is a welcome section and I hope it will deal with some of the problems that have arisen in this area in recent times.

During recent investigations, large numbers of documents have been provided to the Garda without any effort to index the material or to certify the material in a manner that would allow their admissibility in court as evidence without the need for witnesses to prove them. The sheer volume of documentation to be sifted has been a source of delay. Solicitors and barristers have often raised the issue of delays owing to large amounts of documentation. One will often see boxes upon boxes of documentary evidence being wheeled into the court. I welcome that the Bill provides that where the District Court orders the production of material under that section, it may order the person to identify and categorise the material in a particular manner. This provision should speed up the process and ensure that people do not use this as an excuse.

When the Garda proposes to seize large quantities of documents, access to documents can be severely delayed by claims of legal privilege. The Bill provides that where a person refuses to disclose a document to the Garda Síochána or to allow possession of it to be taken pursuant to a District Court order on the grounds that it is privileged legal material, an application may be made to the District Court for a determination as to whether the document is privileged legal material. While I welcome this provision, I hope that the courts will not allow ongoing delays in this area and we will not have further delays. The Minister stated that this procedure should help to avoid unnecessary delays in the resolution of claims of legal privilege. However, there can also often be delays in the District Court and I wonder whether this will happen or whether we will have ongoing legal points of law that may also hold things up.

I welcome the provision in the Bill on withholding information. The Bill provides that no questioning of a person detained may take place until such time as he or she has access to legal advice. While this is only correct, we would hope that there will not be unrealistic delays in this area. Up to now the Garda has adopted a reasonable approach to this and I am sure that will continue. I hope the access to legal advice will happen quickly and we will not have undue delays with people waiting for legal advice.

Overall I welcome the Bill. It is interesting that Mr. Justice Peter Kelly recently commented that an apparent failure to investigate thoroughly yet efficiently and quickly possible wrongdoing in the commercial and corporate sector did nothing to instil confidence in the criminal justice system. Mr. Justice Kelly is rightly saying that we should ensure the legislation we have is properly implemented. When the Minister, Deputy Shatter, was on this side of the House he was very critical of ongoing delays. Mr. Justice Peter Kelly is also referring to what seem to be ongoing delays and when replying the Minister might outline whether there are ongoing delays, particularly in the investigation into Anglo Irish Bank and whether it can be speeded up in the interest of the public, which is very annoyed that such delays are occurring on a regular basis.

See this speech in context