Gary Gannon (Dublin Central, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I acknowledge the speakers who brought the motion to the Dáil but I will not be supporting it. I will not say it contains no good ideas but it loses all reason where it refers to the temporary removal of personal items such as PlayStations, Xboxes and smartphones. Are we serious here? Am I right to believe the Government is not opposing a motion that calls for someone to go into somebody's house and take away their PlayStation? Who exactly? A garda? Is the Government messing? Are we not serious people here? I hear progressive parties across the Chamber say they welcome the motion. Let us get a grip on ourselves here. This is a serious issue and it is worthy of debate, but as we debate it let us actually bring some substance and evidence because it currently makes us all look ridiculous.

The motion is similar to ones that we have spoken about consistently in this Chamber. The cause of antisocial behaviour is the symptom of something much deeper and greater, or what is essentially a perpetual cycle of failure by the State to apply some sort of reason or evidence base and step away to ask what it can actually do to solve the issue. We will not be supporting the motion because it is not grounded in evidence and is ridiculous. It ignores the real results that come when we invest in young people.

Instead of supporting the motion, I want to take the time to talk about deeper, systemic failures. If these were addressed, it could end so-called antisocial behaviour or turn the tide on it. Essentially, our prisons are overcrowded. Someone referred to Oberstown being full and the conditions there in which young people are expected to live and, hopefully, be rehabilitated. Staff are supposed to actually go about their day there. It costs half a million euro per year to keep just one young person in Oberstown. Would that money not be better reinvested to address what causes a young person to be in a situation like that? This would be a better use of public money and a better means of realising the outcome we all have in mind here, which is making our streets safer and breaking the perpetual cycle.

The evidence is right in front of us. In our communities, mine being no exception, great projects are doing amazing work to counter the tide of antisocial behaviour, the violence that goes with it and the fear among residents who are asked to live where it occurs. There are genuine projects working on a fraction of half a million euro per year and doing really great work. I want to talk to the Minister of State about a couple of them.

Belvedere Youth Club, in my constituency, has a programme called Diamond, a youth justice initiative guided by restorative practice and strengths-based and collaborative approaches for young people in the criminal justice system. The project can deal with about 15 young people. If it were resourced to the extent of half a million euro per year, it could probably turn the number into 30; however, the approach is to keep doing the same old thing.

At Bradóg Youth Service, the youth workers have created the most innovative ways of engaging with kids regarding their behaviour, showing them the consequences of drug running and dealing in a way that is not just about sitting them down to give a lecture. We know from Nancy Reagan that does not work. What they actually do is talk to young people and engage with them on their terms. This actually interrupts the cycle of violence. Bradóg is struggling to survive because of extortionate rent and is at constant risk of closing. For half of the half a million euro we spend to keep just one young person in Oberstown, we could probably keep many out of it. Not only that, but there is such a pittance of a maintenance budget that the most at-risk young people are walking to a service down a dingy lane past drug paraphernalia.

My time is up. I could go on all day.

See this speech in context