Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I am broadly supportive of this legislation but, as has been said, it is not the entire solution. It is only right that we give front-line workers as much protection as we can. Too often we think that legislation on its own can solve the ills of the country.

There are a few other elements that must be considered at the same time. We lack a civic culture because we have neglecting the building and consolidation of communities. People respond well when they are enabled more or less to dictate the behaviour in their areas. We also neglect the fact that there are inadequate protections in our public services. I recall talking to a few gardaí in the context of my local annual joint policing committee meeting. They said they would have serious concerns if they were asked to respond to a violent situation on their own because they know that they would not have the back up they needed to protect them. There is not much point, therefore, in having good legislation if it is likely a garda will be sent out to a call without adequate cover and will be assaulted. That was said in Kildare, which has the lowest ratio of gardaí to population in the State and I have made the argument several times that if the same cover was provided in the rest of the country, we would have 4,800 fewer gardaí. Nobody would regard that as an acceptable level of cover, yet it is considered to be in an area with an expanding population and an increasing crime rate.

In addition to legislation, we must examine the supports given to emergency workers whom we ask to go out and protect us. I am a little concerned there could be a difference in the definition of a "front-line worker" between the 1994 Act and this legislation. That needs to be addressed on Committee Stage. If the legislation is accepted, there cannot be ambiguity about who we are trying to protect in the Bill. The legislation deals with cases of serious harm and, clearly, the courts will determine the charge and so on. I am sure the judge, where there is a mental health issue, will recognise that as a mitigating factor in the case. That will provide protection to the accused.

It is unfortunate that the Bill should be necessary but it is clear that there is a growing problem, according to the most recent statistics, with assaults taking place every day. Many of the attacks result from the abuse of drugs or alcohol and unless we go to the core of that problem, we will be unable to provide the protection emergency workers have a right to and deserve. The GRA estimates two gardaí are assaulted every day and it has complained about the time it takes to prosecute these cases, which is another issue that must be considered.

I refer to the HSE cutbacks. The number of people attending accident and emergency departments as a result of assaults is conducive to gang style behaviour in the departments, particularly at weekends. No hospital, for example, can meet the nine-hour target for treating people and this means many people are being left in a small space. That issue also needs to be considered.

We had a good debate on the Private Members' motion tabled by the Technical Group and sponsored by Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan. Significant statistics were mentioned. For example, the abuse of alcohol and alcohol-related problems cost €3.7 billion annually. If the Government has the money to deal with the problems and provide better services, it must attack the origins of our problems in a much more cohesive and comprehensive way. Treating alcohol-related injuries and diseases costs the health care system an estimated €1.2 billion or 8.5% of the annual budget. Each night, 2,000 hospital beds are occupied for alcohol-related reasons while 10% of all inpatient hospital costs, 7% of GP costs and up to 30% of accident and emergency department costs are alcohol-related. There is a long list, which shows how the €3.7 billion is calculated. The harm done to people working on our behalf as front-line responders is a personal cost, which cannot be quantified. We need to deal with this issue in a more comprehensive way. If the Bill is agreed and judges have the opportunity to impose a five-year mandatory sentence, which will cost €70,000 annually for each individual imprisoned, I wonder whether that is the best use of funds. This gets to the heart of the problem. Is it a cost effective way of dealing with it?

The other issue mentioned earlier is what happens at Hallowe'en. It has become an evil time. I acknowledge the night is a celebration of an element of evil in a fun way. However, it is now a night people do not want go out and which has been taken over in some locations by groups. It is a night dreaded by the ambulance and fire services staff. On the night, significant damage is done to property and we must some find way to turn that around. In the US on Hallowe'en night, every street is decorated and it is a fun time. The great irony is that the festival, which is celebrated in an entirely different way in another culture, originated in Ireland. We must look at what can be done that prevents entire communities being handed over to people to whom they should not be handed over. People are often afraid to take on some of the elements who do that.

The ambulance service, the GRA and the unions all argue that there should be a mandatory minimum sentence for these offences. I am not a fan of mandatory sentencing but I will not oppose the Bill because of the particular groups affected. They go out to protect us and they have a right to protection under the law.

No ambulance worker on the Maynooth ambulance will be attacked today. We can guarantee that, because from today, there will not be a ambulance service for Maynooth. It is to be shelved from 7 p.m.

See this speech in context