Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)

I wish to share time with Deputy Catherine Murphy.

I am grateful for the opportunity to contribute to the debate. I welcome the Bill, as it gives us the opportunity to continue the process of cleaning up the Statute Book by repealing Acts which no longer have purpose or relevance in the modern Irish legal system. It also gives us the opportunity to debate the relevance of the legal system which urgently needs to be reformed. I am a member of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality and every day we witness the flaws in the justice system. We must accept the people are not happy with it and want action, change and reform. For example, sentencing policy urgently needs to be reformed. I urge the Minister of State to take on board my views.

In recent days light sentences were handed down in cases involving murder, attacks, violence and intimidation, while a small businessman, Mr. Paul Begley, was sentenced to six years in prison on a tax issue, even though he had paid the penalties. I have been asked where is the justice, logic and fairness in the legal system. This man employed 200 people. He was involved in something, but he put up his hands and paid the penalties. Giving a man six years for such an offence is appalling. It is one of the most appalling miscarriages of natural justice I can recall for many years. It has disappeared off the radar, but I am raising the case now. The judge made an example of Mr. Begley to warn others not to mess with the State coffers. In reality, he did not swindle the taxpayer, a fact not sufficiently highlighted at the time. The garlic tax is a protectionist levy aimed at safeguarding Europe's garlic growers against Chinese imports.

Most of the moneys raised by this tax go straight into the European Union budget, with the State retaining 25% to cover collection costs. Mr. Begley's sentence came in the wake of a landmark ruling in February this year by the Court of Criminal Appeal in the case of a man jailed for 12 years for social welfare fraud. That ruling offered future sentencing guidelines to the effect that significant and systematic frauds perpetrated upon the public revenue should generally be met with immediate and appreciable custodial sentences. In other words, this particular case served as a warning that anybody engaged in such activity should expect a harsh penalty.

I am fully supportive of a justice system which ensures that the person who does the crime will do the time. However, the imposition of a six-year sentence in Mr. Begley's case, at a cost to the State of some €100,000 per year, is not logical. Instead of being imprisoned at enormous expense to taxpayers, that individual should have been made to repay the tax and perhaps given community service. To clarify, I am not saying he should not be prosecuted for what he did, but the sentencing is out of proportion to the crime. I am approached regularly by families in my constituency who are living in fear because of the intimidation exercised by gangs and organised criminals in their neighbourhoods. There are people being assaulted by their teenaged children who are too intimidated to take any action. We must examine the broader issue of how the justice system is letting citizens down. An ex-member of the Garda Síochána expressed the view to me recently that many judges are dissatisfied in their work as a consequence of the recent controversies concerning their salaries. These individuals are, he claimed, trying to make life difficult for the Government and for politicians. I hope that is not the case because it would be appalling.

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh raised the issue of ground rents. The law in that regard is connected to this country's imperial past and should no longer be tolerated. I strongly support ACRA and the National Association of Tenant Organisations in their campaign to abolish ground rents. That issue should be included in the broader debate on legislative reform.

The legislation before us sets out a comprehensive list of statutes which will continue to have force after the passing of the Bill. The Statute Law Revision Act 2009 repealed obsolete local and personal Acts enacted prior to 1851 and private statutes enacted prior to 1751. This Bill will repeal all remaining obsolete local, personal and private Acts enacted prior to independence in 1922. The two key words to consider here are "law" and "revision", and we must take an approach that is radical but sensible at the same time. I welcome the efforts towards statute reform, but the overriding concern must always be the imperative to ensure our laws are based on principles of justice and equality. An important focus in this regard should be a justice system which respects human rights. At the same time, there must be strong support for victims of crime. That issue seems to have gone off the agenda of late and the only people speaking out are the victims themselves. The Government must get its act together, up its game, end the waffle and take action. The justice system must be reflective of the laws of the land and the rights of citizens.

The Criminal Assets Bureau has been in operation for more than a decade and there are long-standing proposals that the moneys confiscated from organised criminals should go back into disadvantaged communities. The late Tony Gregory was the first to make that proposal. I take this opportunity to call for the new bridge over the River Liffey to be named for Mr. Gregory as a mark of respect for his work to combat disadvantage and inequality. The Minister of State should have a word with Big Phil when he comes back from Rio de Janeiro, Colombia or wherever he is with a view to ensuring that is done.

I conclude by stating my intention to support the Bill. Its purpose is to clarify and simplify the Statute Book, thus making it easier to locate statutes and ascertain relevant law. It does so by repealing Acts that are no longer of purpose, providing a comprehensive list of statutes and amending the Adaptation of Enactments Act 1922 to provide for automatic adaptation for pre-1801 statutes. The Bill also deals with local and personal Acts enacted between 1851 and 1922 and private Acts enacted between 1751 and 1922. A great deal of background work has gone into the legislation, with 22,855 statutes analysed as part of the revision exercise. I take this opportunity to thank all of the public servants involved in this important work, particularly those with legal expertise. The current fashion is to bash civil servants, so it is important to commend them on this impressive achievement.

See this speech in context