Joe O'Reilly (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Acting Chairman.

It merits saying at the outset that the question of bail and crime committed while on bail - the misuse of bail - has been in the ether, for want of a better term, or floating around for a considerable time and has been the subject of much debate and discussion among all of us interested in crime detection and prevention. For that reason, it is to the eternal credit of this reforming and progressive Minister, Deputy Fitzgerald, that she has taken the issue in hand and addressed the question in a practical way while maintaining natural justice, due process, etc.

Section 1 of the Bill states that if a person is charged with domestic burglary and has convictions for not less than two relevant offences, then the court must consider these convictions as evidence that the said person is likely to commit another burglary if he or she is released on bail. That is a reasonable contention and all empirical evidence would suggest the correctness of doing that.

According to figures from the CSO, of 5,489 people released on bail from Irish prisons, 60% reoffended in some way within three years. It is a sad statistic that raises a lot of questions, but it is a relevant and unavoidable one. Of this figure, 28% of subsequent offences were burglary. That is also pertinent. The majority of these reoffenders were aged 25 years or older - we are not talking about teenagers here. For offenders who went through a probation order or community service, the amount of recidivism was marginally less. That is to be recognised and welcomed.

Burglary can have a very profound psychological effect on victims. Apart from the physical loss of personal items which may occur, the feelings of intrusion, violation, insecurity and fear become overarching and are often long-lasting. Deputy Ray Butler mentioned it to me informally before the debate from his own perspective. These feelings are common among elderly victims, particularly those living in isolated rural areas. Even the fear of potential burglary is real and is a form of imprisonment. I welcome the fact that the legislation will allow courts to refuse bail to a suspect where there is clear evidence that there were previous convictions for domestic burglary. It is a very important, solid and welcome reform. While it has been talked about for a long time, getting it done is the important thing, and I am happy to be here to recognise it.

Section 2 amends the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act 2001 so that if a person is being sentenced for a domestic burglary, the sentence must run consecutively with any sentence of imprisonment imposed for prior domestic burglary offences, in certain circumstances. It is a very important reform which will increase the punitive dimension and, sadly, it has to happen. There must be consecutive sentencing. There must be clear evidence that burglary is not acceptable, does not work and results in a bad outcome for the burglar. Unfortunately, this element must be included. We would all wish for education and all the other initiatives to work. We are in favour of them and they merit debate in different circumstances. However, there must be clear disincentives and a clear system of punishment for repeat offenders. Bail must not be given in cases of repeat crimes and there must be consecutive sentences where a person has a previous burglary conviction. Section 2 is to be welcomed.

Operation Fiacla, a nationwide operation to crack down on burglaries, led to 11,688 arrests and 6,711 people being charged last year. It is very important that it happened, and it is also important in the context of a debate in which certain Opposition Members have chosen to distort figures, play on people’s fears and engage in pre-election political posturing about crime. The figures are indisputably accurate. Our new Garda burglary unit will use data analysis to target crime gangs, which are predominantly responsible for the majority of domestic burglaries. Operation Thor also deals with this.

In my constituency, Cavan-Monaghan, which is a Border constituency, there is a serious problem with crime gangs which operate across the Border. Thankfully, our local Garda division has an excellent relationship with the PSNI and they work together and share information and resources in order to combat these gangs. Since Operation Fiacla was introduced in 2012, burglary and related offences in the northern region have dropped from 679 to 556. While we do not want 556 burglaries to take place, it is a very significant decrease. Although our crime rates are nowhere near where they need to be, we are getting there. Gardaí in the region must receive the necessary support to combat these crimes. This is why I was pleased to hear recently that the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Fitzgerald, had approved a new Garda regional headquarters for Bailieborough. It is very important and I welcome it. The current station is in a very bad state of repair. The building is old, unfit for purpose and unsuitable to provide the kind of response to crime gangs we need. This is why I am delighted there will be a new, state-of-the-art station, which the Minister has approved. The gardaí are working in third-class conditions. Bailieborough gardaí will have a new station, which will confirm Bailieborough as a regional headquarters. I am very happy that my colleague and good friend, the Minister of State, Deputy Simon Harris, is here today. He has confirmed that he is in the very final stages of acquiring a site for the Garda station. It is not a fiction, but a real thing which has received approval in the capital programme. I am very proud of it. It is the greatest signal my ministerial colleagues and I could send to the gardaí in our division that they are valued, that we want them to operate at a sophisticated, modern level, that we are concerned about crime and that they are being supported properly. It merits being mentioned in this important debate. Garda morale has suffered greatly. It is not germane to the debate to chronicle all the reasons, but the new regional headquarters will improve morale. We should take this opportunity to pay tribute to the individual men and women of the Garda Síochána, who fight crime very competently and sensitively on a daily basis.

I mentioned the new DNA database, which came into operation on 20 November 2015. It will be important to the Garda. The new database will be based in the Phoenix Park and will offer gardaí the most modern technology available in the fight against crime. This high-quality intelligence tool will be especially valuable in the fight against volume crime such as burglary and theft, and in the investigation of serious offences against the person. It will use our digital revolution to work with the gardaí. Garda figures show that 75% of burglaries are committed by 25% of burglars. There is a small pool of repeat offenders, and DNA analysis is very important in this context. The launch of the new database follows the recent publication of legislation to tackle repeat domestic burglars, which we are debating, and the launch of Operation Thor. Operation Thor is aimed at tackling burglars, organised crime gangs and prolific offenders as well as working with communities to prevent crime. Over €5 million is being committed to support this anti-burglary plan, and it is a very important initiative.

There is an issue with cross-Border crime. I am delighted that the new dye is working very significantly to reduce diesel smuggling. Although the crime gangs have the scientific know-how to remove the dye, the expense of doing so is a disincentive. The Government is tough on crime and has been successful. Although there is much we want to achieve, this is a law and order Government and will remain so, which is what people want. People want personal security and to be safe in their homes, and they want no equivocation about it. I am happy with the 640 new Garda cars this year and the €34 million spent on vehicles since 2012.

While I accept the need for free legal aid, it is important that there be attachments, in the context of allowing people a living income so they can get on with their lives. When a person receives free legal aid, there should be an attachment on his or her wages, salary or social welfare over a long period of time to claw the money back. The money should be ring-fenced to deal with crime. Apart from the economic necessity to do this, it would be a further disincentive to committing crime. It should be done humanely, over time and within the context of allowing people a living income. It is important, and I have no embarrassment about saying it. While people are entitled to legal aid in order to ensure they receive due process, they are not entitled to be subsidised. We must be very vigilant on this, as well as monitoring the objective overall cost of free legal aid.

It is a pleasure to participate in the debate. My time is almost up.

See this speech in context