Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister for her comments and her indication of some of the new amendments that will be included in this Bill relating to judicial counsel, certificates of naturalisation and safe third countries. It is important, in the context of recent debate, that if there are safe third countries, it had been indicated we would be looking at what our nearest neighbours are doing. However, it is also important to take into account what the UN and Human Rights Watch are saying about those countries, rather than only looking at other EU member states, which vary greatly, and our nearest neighbour, the UK. We should not only take into account what they are saying with regard to safe countries.

The Bill covers a number of issues, some of which are more urgent than others. While we have certain observations and criticisms of parts of it, we are willing to allow it pass to Committee Stage for further scrutiny.

I will first speak about the expansion of the Court of Appeal and the amendment to the Courts (Establishment and Constitution) Act 1961 that effects this change. It is relatively straightforward. The Court of Appeal replaced the Court of Criminal Appeal. Given the current backlog in the courts, it is important the number of judges be expanded. The Government has, over the past 18 months, implemented an increase in the number of judges across the courts system, which is something we called for. From engaging with the Courts Service, the appointment of a judge carries a requirement to appoint further support staff, and I am hopeful the Minister will assure the House that some provision for extra support staff will also be included. It is like when consultants go into a hospital. They need support staff to do their job properly.

Delays remain within the court system. We received a hard copy letter earlier this year outlining some of the current waiting times in the courts. Some of the more notable delays relate to family law cases in the Circuit Court, where there is a wait of 36 weeks for contested cases. That is an awful long time for families who are seeking to move on with their lives and get a decision as quickly as possible. Things are not much better in the Circuit Court for other civil matters or criminal cases where there is a 45-week wait for civil trials and 76 weeks for criminal trials. In the District Court. some waiting times are alarming. There is a 20-week wait in Bray, County Wicklow, for family and domestic violence cases and similar delays in counties Carlow and Sligo. In Ennis, County Clare, civil cases can take up to 25 weeks and in County Wexford the figure is 20 weeks. I note that in my county of Kerry, Judge Waters, or whoever the judge is there, seems to be making a good fist of it. The wait is down to less than one month in some cases. However, the statistics make clear that emergency barring orders can be made at any time, and I acknowledge that.

I move on to penalties for knife crime. The Bill amends the Firearms and Offensive Weapons Act 1990, which, as the Minister said, increases the penalty on indictment for knife possession from five to seven years. There is no doubt knife offences can be serious. We had a good discussion about this when the Bill was before the justice committee. I am somewhat sceptical about increasing sentences. There was a limit of 12 months for offences under section 9(1) of the Firearms and Offensive Weapons Act. In fact, the new bail Act did not even apply to these offences as they were not defined as serious offences, in the sense that they did not carry a penalty of up to five years. That was amended in 2008 or thereabouts when the penalty was increased from 12 months to five years. However, that increase did not have any deterrent effect as the number of people carrying knives or being charged and convicted did not decrease. I know Deputy Jim O'Callaghan did not provide any clear data to the justice committee to show this provision is needed due to increased enforcement or because there are more people carrying knives. Given the decline in the number of gardaí in urban areas especially, the latter may well be the case.

With regard to sections 9(5), 10 and 11, I agree it is important that the necessary penalties are in place. However, I am sceptical that increased sentences will deter. The number of knives seized increased from 1,342 in 2013 to 2,186 in 2023 after the increase in the maximum sentence, which is now to be increased again. There do not seem to be any statistics - certainly none have been made available to - showing how many of those cases get to the Circuit Court where they are dealt with on indictment. My experience was always that possession of knife charges, in particular, were dealt with in the District Court. The increase in the penalty by two years, from five to seven years, will not be relevant in most cases where the section 9(1) charge is brought.

We also received correspondence from the Courts Service indicating that detections and prosecutions seem to be increasing despite increased penalties. Available Garda numbers are almost exactly the same now as they were in 2011 when Fine Gael took office, despite the massive population increase during that time. We need more solutions. I see the increase in knife crime but what about increased investment in communities, working with youth justice and investing in the areas where people tend to get arrested, which are usually working class areas? We need more solutions for young people in those urban areas. Increased penalties alone will not make a difference.

We need a more nuanced model of deterrence and diversion, as I am sure the Minister will agree.

I have sponsored a Bill that will come before the House on Thursday of next week relating to restorative justice, although the issue seems to have been knocked off the current agenda. I do not mind whether it is done through my Bill or a Government Bill, but I hope something will be done in the area of restorative justice before the end of the Government's term in order that people who are charged with these offences can be dealt with some way other than by prosecution at all times.

In respect of the increase to the mandatory retirement age for the emergency services to 62 years, we are broadly supportive of an optional extension to the retirement age given the crisis in recruitment and retention throughout the public services, as are some of the unions involved, but the Bill contains specific means of introducing these changes that are worrying some of the representative organisations. Sections 9 to 11, inclusive, grant sweeping and wholesale powers to various Ministers to change the pension age at their discretion, which could affect new entrants and could effectively end the principle of fast pension accrual that makes these tough jobs attractive to so many. At a time when there is a crisis in retention and recruitment, this may not improve matters. Does the Minister have any plans regarding these new powers and does she accept this will give the Minister of the day unilateral power to change the retirement age with no legal obligation to consult the unions? A Sinn Féin Government would prioritise a recruitment and retention task force for the Garda to report back within a few months of the appointment of a new justice Minister. The retention of Garda members is increasingly important, and while older members are less likely to be on front-line duties, they can still perform important functions. If they are willing to continue to serve, they should be allowed to do so. We need to understand where projected resignations stand this year, given last year was a record year for resignations.

On the changes relating to immigration, the immigration system has been creaking for a long time. The housing crisis has been exploited by certain people to undermine civic discourse and undercut progressive campaigns for better housing, healthcare and education. The underlying reasons for the migration crisis also need to be tackled. We need a migration system that is efficient but also enforced, and underneath that, it has to be fair and due process has to be given to anybody who is applying. The measures in the Bill meet the requirements, but the question is why they have taken so long to be brought forward. We support the increase in fines and the announcement on immigration administrative duties being taken away from the Garda, but again, additional staff will be needed. There need to be updates, with other non-core duties removed. What about the Garda Reserve? Will it have a function?

The increase in carrier fines is important but there do not seem to be any guidelines under section 2(8) of the Immigration Act. There will be a threat of fines, but will there also be guidance from the Government about it? Of course, the airports are no longer the main means by which international protection applicants enter the country, and the carrier fines have worked to reduce the number of people trying to enter without documentation but have done little to stem the overall numbers.

We will support the Bill in moving to Committee Stage and, for now, we will not oppose it.

See this speech in context