Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I want to start by saying a few words in support of miscellaneous provisions legislation. Sometimes it gets treated very harshly in the House. Criticisms are made about it that centre on the claim that it entails a scattergun approach to legislating and that we need a much more holistic approach to individual issues. I disagree. The great benefit of miscellaneous provisions legislation is that it gets important areas of the law changed in a very prompt fashion. Sometimes if there is a discussion about making changes to the law, such as the firearms legislation or the immigration legislation, someone in a Department suggests we should have a review of the legislation in its totality. In effect, that means proposed changes are delayed for at least a couple of years when, in fact, what is generally and specifically required is amending legislation to change concise and specific aspects of the law. That is why I welcome the legislation being introduced today. I also support it because approximately three of its provisions proposed by the Minister were previously advanced by Fianna Fáil. I very much welcome their adoption and, I hope, their enactment by the Oireachtas in due course.

The first provision on which I want to speak concerns Part 5 of the Bill, which concerns amending the firearms and offensive weapons legislation of 1990. As the Ceann Comhairle may be aware, I, on behalf of Fianna Fáil, introduced a Bill in this House in March 2021 seeking to amend the Firearms and Offensive Weapons Act to provide for greater sentences for persons convicted of possession of a knife with intent to cause harm. The reason that legislation was introduced in March 2021 was that there had been some tragic and horrific examples at that time of young men – regrettably, it is generally young men – who had been involved in and were the victims of serious knife attacks in the city of Dublin and indeed Cork. The purpose of the legislation was to seek to increase the penalty for possession of a knife from five years to ten. I therefore very much welcome what the Minister is proposing to do here. She indicated in her speech earlier that I have legislation that has now reached Committee Stage in the justice committee. I would be happy to see the Minister’s legislation take its place if it can be enacted faster.

I accept and acknowledge some of the points made by colleagues today on the legislation. I am not suggesting, and I do not believe anyone in the House believes, that by simply increasing the penalty for knife crime, the problem of knife crime will be solved. That requires a much broader approach; it requires educating, teaching and telling young men and boys that it is unacceptable for them to bring out knives at night, even though they may believe they would only ever use them to defend themselves. As evident from Garda statistics on seizures, there has been a greater number of seizures of knives. One mechanism of sending a message to people that carrying a knife is unacceptable behaviour is increasing the penalty available to the courts when persons are convicted of possession of knives under the Firearms and Offensive Weapons Act. There is a benefit to doing that. If we were to decide, with respect to all legislation, that not prosecuting or increasing the penalty because the incidence of a crime is increasing or remains high, it would be a self-defeating objective. Therefore, I welcome the proposed legislation.

I also welcome what is proposed in Part 3 of the legislation, which seeks to amend the Immigration Act. This proposal was also put forward by Fianna Fáil. I welcome the fact that the Minister is taking on the suggestion that we need to increase the sentences for carriers that find themselves in circumstances in which individuals who have been allowed to get onto an aeroplane or ferry with the necessary passport or documentation do not have it when getting off. There is an obligation on carriers to ensure people getting onto their aircraft or ferries have appropriate passports and documentation. If they do not comply with the statutory obligation, there should be a meaningful fine.

I ask the Minister to consider again the proposed amendments. They are quite limited. It is proposed to increase the fines from €3,000 to just €5,000 and from €1,500 to just €2,500. More meaningful fines would be appropriate and should be considered by the Minister on Committee Stage.

I note that part of the legislation concerns the proposed change to the retirement age for members of An Garda Síochána and other emergency services. Deputy Nash spoke about the change to the Garda retirement age. My recollection is that Garda retirement is generally governed by statutory instrument. If so, I would welcome hearing from the Minister on when it is likely that we will see a change to the statutory instrument governing Garda retirement so the retirement age will change from 60 years to 62 years.

I also noted that the Minister said that when the Bill gets to Committee Stage or Report Stage, she intends to have submitted further amendments to enact provisions necessary as a result of the decision of the High Court last March on a challenge to section 72A of the International Protection 2015. As the Ceann Comhairle will be aware, that section deals with the designation of safe third countries. That is a procedure different from the one the Minister announced today in respect of safe countries under section 72. The only country we have to date designated as a safe third country is, in my recollection, the United Kingdom. Clearly, that is appropriate and should obtain. Unfortunately, however, because of inadequacies in section 72A, as enacted, the High Court has determined that we need to introduce amending legislation. I ask that the Minister do so. I am pleased to hear she proposes to do so through her amendments. It also could be very fortunate timing if, as appears to be the case, there is to be a change of Government in the UK. If the Rwanda policy is to be abandoned, as has been indicated by the Labour Party in the UK, it will certainly remove any question mark over the suitability of the UK as a safe third country.

See this speech in context