Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I do appreciate the Deputies who are here and have raised points. I will always take them on board and engage where issues have been raised. To clarify, I was shaking my head in relation to the comment on the Seanad because I attended the Seanad and there were no Opposition Senators there to discuss or debate any elements of this Bill.

In terms of this being a miscellaneous provisions Bill, Deputy Howlin and I spoke about this when we discussed the last such Bill, of which this may be the fourth I have introduced in the past four years. The reason we have miscellaneous provisions Bills is that there are cases where changes are required. They may be minimal, amendments or responses to courts that do not naturally fit into other legislation passing through the Houses. If we were to wait for other legislation, some would never be done. They tend to happen towards the end of a term because these issues have arisen during the term and this is the only mechanism to enact them. While I appreciate the timing is not always perfect, at the same time, these are important changes that are needed, particularly those where we have judgments in the courts. I appreciate everyone’s support and engagement on this and the timeframe in which we have been trying to enact it.

I will try to touch on some of the points raised. On sentencing for knife crime, I think we all agree that increasing sentencing alone will not prevent people from going out with a knife or with an intention of carrying out a crime with a knife. It is, however, one of a number of things we need to do to reduce the number of incidents. They have been slowly increasing. To take some of the figures around convictions, for the section 95 offence, possession of a knife in a public place with intent to cause injury, the number of convictions increased by ten between 2020 and 2023. That is a small number but it is still an increase. However, if we take the offence of production, while committing an offence or in the course of a dispute, of an article capable of inflicting serious injury, convictions have increased from 90 to 152. We must acknowledge that these types of crimes are increasing and there is an increase in convictions.

The reason for setting a higher maximum penalty is to provide more flexibility for the judge. If a judge opts for the highest end of the maximum sentence and there are mitigating factors, such as a guilty plea, taken into account, the sentence is suddenly much lower. Any time the maximum sentence is increased, it is to give greater flexibility where there are mitigating factors. However, this has to be done with other things, such as youth diversion programmes which are very important for younger people. Funding for these programmes has increased by 10%. I have been working on this with the Minister of State, Deputy Browne, for the past three years. The budget is now €33 million, which means we can now start to focus on and be more targeted in certain areas, working with younger people.

We also have certain programmes being rolled out across the country. Only recently, I visited Moyross Youth Academy, a wonderful youth diversion programme that works hand in hand with education. The community safety innovation fund, which was established by this Government to take proceeds of crime and put it directly back into communities, has developed a new programme called Céim ar Chéim. It is about non-violent conflict resolution, in particular with younger people, specifically looking at knife crime. That money has come directly from that fund. It is all these things. We are investing in all these types of programmes, working with youth diversion programmes. Sentencing as a tool when someone has been convicted is also really important. It is about making sure we invest in every part of the justice system, not just increasing sentencing. This work was done by the anti-social behaviour forum. It is a recommendation I am happy to accept and it is important we put it in place.

Speaking more broadly, Deputies, especially Deputy Gannon, have mentioned the community safety partnership and spoken about breaking the cycle. It is not just about breaking the cycle between a family or generations but the cycle of how we do things. The whole point of the partnerships is to move away from the idea that community safety is just a matter for the Garda or for gardaí to be able to respond. It has to be a whole-of-community response. It is not that there is a big pot of money that will be put aside, separate from all the Departments. It is getting the Departments, agencies and the people delivering services around the table to look at how to connect everything that is being done and do so more efficiently, with a particular focus and emphasis on community safety. That money is already in the health service, youth diversion programmes and education. It is already in government. It is about how it is spent and how we better co-ordinate thinking about community safety. I am not sure if that message has got across but it is about breaking the cycle of how we have always looked at community safety and doing it in a different way.

On the increase in retirement age, I am speaking from a justice perspective and engaging with prison officers, as I did at their conference in Sligo this year, and gardaí. There are members who do not want to retire at 60 years and they do not have a choice. Increasing retirement age will not force everybody to work until the age of 62. People can still retire before that but it gives an option and acknowledges that people want to work and are able to work for longer. We have to consider that when it comes to the fast accrual, and Deputies have raised this, is that it is there for a reason. It has always acknowledged that in certain types of work, people have to retire earlier because they may not be able to do work for longer. Therefore, there is 20 years of normal accrual and ten years of fast accrual. If people suddenly start working longer, obviously the reason for fast accrual starts to weaken. If a member joins at 20 and works for 30 years, he or she will still have their full accrual pension and can retire at 50 and do something else. That does not change here. Someone who joins later, as people can now do at the age of 35 or 36, he or she will still get some of that fast accrual and will still get a normal accrual at between 60 and 62. Obviously, if people work longer, the rationale for that begins to diminish. It will not impact those who are already there and can retire at that age. This has been sought and it is important that we maintain the expertise and knowledge, not only within An Garda Síochána and the Prison Service but also within the Defence Forces. If that age were to increase even further, it would have to be done in consultation with the organisations. I would not suggest otherwise for a second.

The Damache judgment has been raised a number of times in the last week or two. This power already exists. It is one the Minister already has in certain instances where someone has already obtained citizenship through fraudulent means or now poses a threat or risk to the State.

It is a power the Minister already has in certain instances where somebody has obtained citizenship through fraudulent means or he or she now poses a threat or risk to the State. There was a judgment which suggested that there needed to be a change in how that was applied and that is simply what is happening here.

Very briefly, regarding judges, I have introduced 24 new judges into our system, which is the largest increase ever. That is on top of the six High Court judges and those in the Court of Appeal before that. There will be a second tranche of 20 judges. The work of the review is under way at the moment. I very much intend to stick to that deadline but we have just not got to the point where that has been published yet. Separately then, obviously the Family Courts Bill will move to take so much of the delays mentioned by Deputy Daly into a separate family court structure giving them their own structure separate to what exists now. That will obviously require resources and additional supports as well but I hope to be able to progress that Bill as soon as possible. Regarding the sentencing guidelines, the Judicial Council is working to provide them as soon as possible and I hope to have an update soon.

Finally, in terms of the fines review, we have looked at what types of fines were applied across the EU. Therefore, we are bringing this very much in line with our counterparts in the EU but there has to be a level of engagement as well. It is not just about the stick, if I can put it that way. We have worked really closely with airlines over the past number of years and what that has resulted in is the staff themselves having a greater understanding of what to look for and how they can spot and identify if documents are false or incorrect. Along with fines which are already being applied, that work alone has resulted in about a 40% reduction of people coming with the wrong or false documents. Yes, we need to have an incentive to make sure they are doing it properly but we have to work with them as well and that is what we have always tried to do, as well as the work of the BMU's border management teams and all the work the Garda is doing as well. In general, I welcome the comments by colleagues and I am obviously happy to engage with them between now and next week. The amendments will be published on Thursday so we will have further time to discuss.

See this speech in context