Patrick O'Donovan (Limerick, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome this opportunity to speak. At the outset, I wish to compliment the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Frances Fitzgerald, on the work she has done to date in her Department. There is no doubt that the Minister inherited an awful lot of problems in the Department. They have been well enunciated at this stage. Both sides of the House can agree, however, that the current Minister is dealing with a number of criminal justice issues that have dogged Garda management for many years. Everybody recognises that, including political commentators and the Opposition.

The Bill before us concerns a scourge that has afflicted this country for a long number of years. I have not been a victim of it, thanks be to God, and I would not wish it on anybody. It is horrendous to have somebody invade one's personal property, be it a home or business. The victims of these crimes are quite rightly asking a number of legitimate questions, including the number of people out on bail, the length of bail terms, and the number of convictions that a person can clock up and still get out on bail. In addition, they are asking about the cost to the State of legal aid in criminal cases, the number of times someone can gain access to such aid, and the type of people who offer criminal aid and profiteer on the back of it. I know that people must be properly represented in the courts and I do not have an issue with that. However, our courts service is regularly being treated as a fairground by criminals, so we will have to examine what is happening in that regard. It is a societal issue as much as one for the Government. How many chances does a person get before somebody eventually calls a halt to this?

I have listened to people at public meetings, clinics and marts across rural constituencies similar to my own. Their biggest frustration is the number of times the same people attend the same courts week after week. The provincial newspapers are reporting such cases. There is a level of frustration and people are legitimately asking how many times this has to happen before it is halted. In that context, there is a question for the Judiciary. Due to the separation of powers, I know it is frowned upon for Members of the Oireachtas to have the audacity to criticise members of the Judiciary. In some cases, however, one would really wonder what planet some of them inhabit. Given some of the sentences and commentary handed down from the Bench, as reported in the media, it is not the same planet that I and others inhabit.

While it would not be in keeping with a lot of Members' feelings in this House, to be quite honest, the element of deterrent for repeat offenders has gone out the window in many cases. They do not see a deterrent or any real punishment. For some of them it is almost like a badge of honour at this stage. A quarter of the sentence will be struck out straight away for good behaviour - whatever that is, since a person can have 300 or 400 convictions and still get time off for good behaviour. Before we know it, they will be back out again and perhaps up in front of the same judge on another charge before the first sentence has even come to its natural conclusion.

There is a level of public frustration and it is important for it to be voiced. My primary concern is for the victims. The free criminal legal aid people have the interests of the perpetrators of these crimes at heart. They do everything in their power to get them off.

In some cases, they are very effective, and good luck to them. However, the victims of crime have to pick up the pieces. They wonder what the State has done for them to get retribution and where they are left as a result. There is a temptation in criminal justice issues to focus on the perpetrator of the crime to see what can be done for him and how the perpetrator can be rehabilitated. At the same time, the victim is left to pick up the pieces. He may get a letter from the local gardaí, who have done their best to try to bring the perpetrator to justice, but that is it. This is no longer good enough. More needs to be done to ensure repeat offenders are dealt with. Repeat offenders are at the crux of this. Such people have 300 or 400 convictions but they can be on bail carrying on as if there is no law for them.

The previous speaker referred to Garda recruitment. It is important to point out that there are limitations on Garda recruitment because we can only fit so many people in Templemore. The previous speaker was advocating the creation of a new Garda college for tens of thousands of recruits, but he was somewhat vague on how he would pay for it and where he would train them. The important point is that for the first time in a long time there is meaningful recruitment in An Garda Síochána. That is what people want.

In my constituency, ten Garda stations have been closed. I rang the community council in one of the areas where the Garda station was due to be closed, and I was asked by the person whether it was still open. The person believed it had been closed already. One political party has a seven-point plan to deal with criminal justice and the justice area. Those involved have added two points to our plan. Anyway, the plan does not mention the reopening of even one Garda station. Perhaps that party will have an eight-point plan.

I am calling for one thing that has been referred to by previous speakers. It relates to the conveyor belt of repeat offenders going before the courts and the costs associated with criminal legal aid. I am keen for some measure of fixed prices in respect of the money allocated to deal with this.

See this speech in context