Thomas Pringle (Donegal South West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

The Taoiseach says rural crime is nothing new and that it is the level of sophistication of criminals these days that makes policing very difficult, resulting in the violent crimes that have haunted rural Ireland. He has creatively profiled these sophisticated criminals as 21st century thieves, wearing night vision goggles and driving at excessive speeds down our motorways while high on drugs. He has used this criminal profile to justify the implementation of what he terms 21st century policing. However, it is his notion of 21st century policing that has left rural Ireland vulnerable to these types of criminals in the first place. The Government is conveniently blaming the sophistication of these criminals and not the Government's own failures for the violent attacks that have put fear into the heart of rural Ireland.

The real issue here is not that the criminals are becoming more sophisticated, it is that the centralisation of Ireland's police force has not worked in tackling violent crime since the Government first implemented these policies in 2011. The policy was simple: take away community policing, close rural Garda stations and use those savings to pool the resources into a centralised police force. Mobile criminals have exploited the policing vacuum created from continuous Garda station closures. Worse still, they are not getting caught, profiled and tracked, which is what those policies sought to achieve in the first place.

Community policing was replaced with the Garda district and station rationalisation programme, which was announced in 2011 by the former Minister, Deputy Shatter, and represented the biggest restructuring in the history of An Garda Síochána. The programme's aim was to centralise policing resources in order to facilitate the introduction of "enhanced patrolling systems", becoming operational and intelligence-led. Part of its policy was the closure of 139 Garda stations across the country, which has unfairly and disproportionately impacted on rural Ireland.

The anomaly in all this is the Government's justification for these closures. It says it has created 61,000 more man hours for front-line services. The Government believes 61,000 man hours is worth more than a local Garda presence in rural Ireland. In fact, 61,000 hours only equates to an extra 30 gardaí across the country, when one takes the annual hours they serve. All the while, the State only saves €556,000 a year and continues to implement cutbacks in Garda resources. In Donegal this has amounted to only €25,000 in savings from the closure of five rural Garda stations in the county. The costs of providing alternative services from other Garda stations have not been factored into the station closures. These gardaí have to travel further out to assist members of the public as a result. Centralisation is not working and rural Ireland has not seen the benefits of enhanced patrolling systems or intelligence-led operations. The Government has justified the closure of stations by saying it would mean a more efficient and effective deployment of resources in the area of policing.

The opposite has been the case. There are more vulnerable towns and people throughout the country and there have been major cutbacks to Garda resources. The Government is aware of all of this and has reflected this awareness in the recent capital plan. It has allocated €46 million for new Garda vehicles, €18 million for refurbishment of Garda stations, €700,000 to upgrade Garda cars and €205 million for Garda technology systems. From these investment measures in the capital plan, it is clear that centralisation still dominates the agenda while local policing is a thing of the past. The public can be sure this will continue in the next term if the Government is re-elected. New Garda cars and technology systems and upgrades to existing equipment will do nothing to bolster community policing in rural areas. Those areas need an increased presence of local gardaí. We need more resident community Garda personnel who have intimate knowledge of their localities and are aware of the at-risk offenders in their areas.

The lack of local gardaí has led not just to an increase in rural crime but also to the perception of crime and the vulnerability of our communities. As crime is carried out, people feel they are not adequately protected and this could lead to notions of vigilante justice and individuals taking the law into their own hands. The latter was mentioned in the media recently. In addition, rural communities have been shrinking due to the mass emigration of young people, job losses, threats of post office closures and actual Garda station closures. It has resulted in an aging population, the members of which are more susceptible to burglaries in their homes. The shrinking of rural communities has also led to increased geographical isolation of dwellings and less knowledge of the local areas due to the closure of post offices and Garda stations.

I am concerned about consecutive custodial sentencing. Who are these burglars and to what extent will consecutive custodial sentencing deter them from committing this kind of crime? The idea that consecutive sentencing will deter people from carrying out similar crimes and reduce recidivism rates is questionable. International best practice is increasingly gaining insight into this outdated notion. CSO figures suggest a significant discrepancy in recidivism between people who received custodial sentences and those who received probation or community service. According to the CSO figures, recidivism rates were lower for offenders who committed burglary if they received probation or community service, 49%, as opposed to those who received a custodial sentence, 60%. The CSO figures also show that 28% of burglars who had served a custodial sentence and who reoffended committed a subsequent burglary offence, as opposed to 10.7% of those who had received probation or community service. The majority of these reoffending burglars were aged 24 or under.

The punitive approach to sentencing has led to an increase in prisoner numbers while recidivism rates remain high. Rather than examining why recidivism rates are high and the contribution custodial sentencing is making to repeat offences, the Government wants to make it harder for repeat offenders to receive bail, meaning they will stay in prison longer and further continue the cycle of recidivism, proving the adage that prison is the university of crime. According to figures from the Irish Prison Service, in 2014 the average annual cost of an available staffed prison space was €68,959. This figure represented an increase of €3,417 on the previous year. How much will it cost to imprison someone without bail and for consecutive sentences? Would it not be far more cost-effective to use community service and probation and see the recidivism figures decrease as a result?

This brings me to the most ironic aspect of the Bill. Due to a reduction in Garda services in rural Ireland, there has been an increase in burglaries. The Bill will increase sentencing for the criminals involved, which will require more law enforcement and more Garda resources. It is a vicious cycle. The real deterrent is increased Garda presence and if 21st century policing means fewer gardaí, I, and those who live in rural Ireland, would prefer that we stick with 20th century policing instead.

See this speech in context