John O'Donoghue (Kerry South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As Deputies Seymour Crawford and Chris Andrews are not present, I call Deputy Mattie McGrath.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am delighted to speak on this issue. The Bill contains a range of different measures which are appropriate to address by way of legislation to further improve the overall criminal justice system and to update existing statutes in some areas where it is decided that there is a need to do so. We all know there is such a need at this point in time. It is also extremely important to ensure that a gun culture is not allowed to form in the State. Therefore, a substantial and important part of this Bill is devoted to the licensing of firearms and associated issues.

In total there are 17 firearms and offensive weapons-related sections which can be grouped into the following categories: public safety and control issues; technical matters; and efficiency and modernisation measures. In addition, section 28 addresses the licensing of handguns. I am aware that some people have a strongly-held view that once they are of good character and make the necessary secure arrangements for the storage of their firearms, they should be free to have firearms of any kind licensed to them. I do not agree with this view, which would represent an unacceptable situation where our gun laws could mirror those of countries such as the United States. If the present situation continued unchecked, this would happen and we cannot allow it. A situation where firearms were freely available, as in some jurisdictions where there is a notification system and one purchases the firearm and simply informs the authorities afterwards, is not acceptable.

Proposals for reform in this area include a ban on the issuing of new licenses for handguns, although there will be limited exceptions in regard to handguns designed for use in connection with competitions governed by International Olympic Committee regulations. Those who already have licenses can, when they are due for renewal, apply to have them renewed, albeit under the new licensing procedure where the safety of the community will be paramount.

Section 31 will bring tighter control in the importation of firearms and ammunition by specifying that such importation may be made only by a registered firearms dealer on foot of an importation licence having being granted by the Department. In Irish law, firearms are already divided into two categories: non-restricted and restricted. This Bill proposes a measure to increase the ability to categorise firearms. It introduces the concept of a prohibited firearm, and section 25 proposes that the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform should have the residual powers to be able to declare certain firearms and ammunition to be prohibited. The Minister should, however, keep the situation in regard to firearms licensing under review in the interests of public safety. This residual power will, in particular, allow the Minister to address any particular issues which arise threatening the safety of the community. Addressing these concerns is our primary function but it is important to stress that the Minister's proposals will not impinge adversely on the activities of the majority of licensed firearms holders.

Section 35 regulates the sale and use of realistic imitation firearms, including devices known as airsoft. These items are practically indistinguishable from real firearms and have on occasion been used to intimidate and rob, and in anti-social behaviour. This Bill will also make the possession of realistic imitation firearms in a public place a serious offence. These measures will help those who play airsoft to protect their activity from irresponsible and casual purchasers.

There are two sections in regard to the control of weapons arising from fatal stabbings. I welcome the proposal to increase the maximum prison sentence for possessing a knife in a public place from one year to five and to extend the power of search without warrant in circumstances where the Garda Síochána has reasonable grounds to suspect a person is carrying an article for unlawful purposes, which is an important power to give the Garda. We must also examine the issue of community service. While I welcome the increase in sentences, given the situation pertaining with regard to people in prisons, community service should be considered where possible. It is also welcome that a new firearms and offensive weapons order, to deal with the issue of samurai swords, will be introduced.

Section 27 of the Bill will allow the Garda Commissioner or the Minister to issue guidelines on the practical application of the Firearms Acts. The Garda Commissioner, as head of the licensing authority, proposes to introduce guidelines which will be publicly available. These guidelines will attempt to address one of the main criticisms of the current licensing system, which is the lack of uniformity in the application of the Firearms Acts and the processing of applications. The Garda established a firearms policy unit in 2008, to help to ensure that the Commissioner's policies on firearms licensing are clearly understood and standardised throughout the force. The unit has been invaluable in resolving problems and complaints relating to applications. This country's firearms legislation, which stretches back more than 80 years and across five main Acts, has been criticised by commentators from the legal profession as being difficult to interpret. The Law Reform Commission has scheduled a restatement of the Firearms Act, which will help to alleviate this problem.

Part 1 of the Bill contains the standard preliminary features of all legislative proposals, including the Short Title, the interpretation section and the provision that the Exchequer will bear the costs of administering the Bill when enacted. Part 2 contains amendments to the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003, as amended by the Criminal Justice (Terrorist Offences) Act 2005. The 2003 Act, which gave effect to the EU framework decision on the European arrest warrant, replaced extradition arrangements between member states with a system of surrender based on arrest warrants issued by judicial authorities of member states. The amendments proposed in this part of the Bill are necessary to deal with issues that have arisen in the administration and implementation of the 2003 Act. As the House will be aware, the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003 has been in operation for more than five years. There is now a better understanding in Ireland and across all member states of the European arrest warrant system.

The Bill before the House will complete the process of reforming the firearms licensing regime, which was started by the Criminal Justice Act 2006. The Minister is taking this opportunity to introduce some further necessary changes to ban the widespread licensing of handguns and to hinder the development of undesirable shooting practices. I am aware of such problems in my community in County Tipperary, which is quite near other parts of Munster that have had huge problems with gun crime. Such activity must be nipped in the bud before it starts to spill over into other towns and villages. The proposed amendments to the Firearms Acts will prohibit the issuing of licences for new handguns, with some exceptions in the cases of starting pistols and Olympic target guns. This Bill also sets out a tightened procedure for the renewal of existing handgun licences. It gives the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the power to prohibit the possession, use, sale, manufacture, repair and importation of specified firearms and ammunition. The Bill before the House also restricts the importation and sale of realistic imitation firearms. It will give the Garda increased powers of search where there is reasonable cause to suspect that a person has in his or her possession an offensive weapon without just cause or lawful authority. The new licensing regime that is being introduced will streamline the current system and ensure that licence fees may be paid at locations other than a Garda station. The licensing period will be also extended.

This legislation makes technical amendments to a number of other statutes, including the Bail Act 1997, the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act 2001, the Summary Jurisdiction Act 1857 and the Criminal Justice Act 1984. The Bill also contains four provisions that will give further effect to the decision on the establishment and the operation of the Schengen information system. In practical terms, it will improve the operation of the European arrest warrant system. It will give the Garda and the staff of the Revenue Commissioners the power to exchange information with other states that are party to the Schengen information system. Some of the other changes envisaged in this Bill are technical in nature. Nevertheless, it is important for the criminal justice system that they are legislated for and that the proposed technical amendments are dealt with to the satisfaction of Deputies.

I commend the Bill to the House.

John Deasy (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

My involvement in this issue started when I spoke to my colleague, Deputy Noonan, about a short article we had both read in a national newspaper. We were surprised that the report suggested there had been an increase in the number of legally-held handguns in this country. A couple of other Deputies later told me they knew of people who had applied for and received permission to purchase handguns, even though they were not members of shooting clubs. It seems that certain superintendents are perfectly prepared to give people permission to buy guns simply because the people in question want to own a gun. I decided to submit some parliamentary questions on the matter and received my first substantive response on 17 June 2008, as follows:

I have been informed by the Garda authorities that there has been an increase in the number of handguns licensed in this jurisdiction since 2004 following a legal challenge taken on the temporary custody order made in 1972 by the then Minister for Justice. Prior to that it was generally not the practice to issue licences for handguns.

The figures given to me by the Minister spoke for themselves. The cumulative number of licensed handguns increased from zero in 2003-04 to 305 in 2004-05, to 946 in 2005-06, to 1,367 in 2006-07 and to 1,701 in 2007-08. I think Deputies on both sides of the House were genuinely surprised when I read out those figures in the Chamber. Frankly, they were shocked. Members had assumed there was a ban on handguns. The fact that people in this country could get their hands on handguns quite freely was news to them. It has been assumed that members of the general public were prohibited from accessing handguns.

I propose to set out, in layman's terms, what has happened. The licensing of handguns in this country was liberalised in 2004, following a number of legal challenges. The loosening of the law governing the licensing of handguns has resulted, since 2004, in the issuing of approximately 1,800 handgun licences by Garda superintendents throughout the country. When I asked senior gardaí in my constituency of Waterford to tell me what the situation was, they made it clear that they were not happy about the distinct lack of uniformity in this area. They complained that although guidelines should have been introduced to govern the licensing of handguns, that had not been done. They told me they discouraged applications for handgun licences as much as possible. They mentioned that an individual had taken the Garda superintendent in Waterford city to the High Court after he refused to issue a licence for a handgun. The judge in the case ruled against the force, on the basis that if one is prepared to give an individual a licence for a shotgun or a rifle, there is no good reason one should not give that person a licence for a handgun. That left the Garda Síochána in my constituency in an interesting position. The members of the force feel they are in a compromising position.

If the Garda in my constituency are reticent about issuing handgun licences - it does everything it can to limit the number of such licences - who is issuing all the licences mentioned in the Minister's reply? It has become clear that superintendents in certain districts and divisions around the country are perfectly prepared to issue handgun licences. Having tabled three or four parliamentary questions on the matter, I finally received a response last year that painted a fairly disturbing picture. The comparative statistics for the various Garda divisions speak for themselves. Some 188 handgun licences were issued in the Wexford Garda division in 2007-08. In Dublin North Central seven were issued, in Wicklow, 161, and in Mayo 14. There is no uniformity in the system of licensing. It has been carried out in an ad hoc and subjective manner. The district figures are worse, some recording 108 handgun licences others one or none, in many cases. After The Irish Times published those figures people accepted that this area needed immediate regulation.

I read and listen to commentators giving out about the cost of parliamentary questions and the abuse of them. I am not sure we would be here today debating and pursuing a ban on handguns were it not for the much-maligned and humble parliamentary question. Sometimes it is all we on this side of the House have. We are all labelled legislators but in reality Opposition Members are on occasion only bit players in the legislative process. Our only weapon, if it can be called that, is the parliamentary question. On this side of the House we are painfully used to getting useless, bland and diversionary replies. Occasionally, however, they yield figures which in some cases, like this one, reveal a problem.

I followed the debate in the House last week to an extent when some speakers questioned the existence of a handgun culture. I disagree with them on the basis of the numbers involved. According to my latest correspondence from the Office of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, on 18 May, 579 new licences were issued from January to December 2008. There is a handgun culture which has grown rapidly, as the figures prove. Interestingly, the figures from November 2008 when the Minister announced the ban are much lower, month for month. That trend seems to have continued into 2009 when in the first four months of the year 81 handgun licences were issued. For the corresponding period in 2008, 215 were issued. It is clear that some superintendents around the country have stopped issuing these licences pending legislative clarity. Some have continued to issue them.

One speaker last week made a strong case for gun and shooting clubs and said, "there is no credible evidence to link legally held handguns with crime of any kind". When I heard that I recalled that last January a gang held up a gun dealer 20 or 30 miles from where I live and took handguns. He was not the only gun dealer targeted by criminals looking for handguns. Last November, in the North, a gun dealer was robbed and the haul included two Glock 9 mm pistols a Sig Sauer 9 mm pistol and six other target pistols.

The gardaí in my constituency referred me to a robbery in which the robbers left the shotgun and rifle but took the handgun. The members of these 40-odd gun clubs may be of good character but the more handguns are licensed the more will make their way into the hands of criminals. That occurs fairly regularly. The gardaí in my constituency have always been at pains to point out that there is no guarantee that guns will not be stolen from individual householders as this kind of proliferation grows and that is why they do not issue licences. The Garda Ombudsman, Kathleen O'Toole, makes the same point. She says these guns have got into the hands of criminals in this way in other jurisdictions.

I was surprised that in the debate last week people who had reservations about the ban never mentioned the gardaí or their views on the matter. I have taken my lead from the senior officers in my constituency based on their experience and opinion of, this matter. They are under no illusion about what needs to happen. They believe that the sooner this Bill is passed and enacted the better. During the course of the debate over the past 12 months we also heard from the Garda Commissioner, Fachtna Murphy. When he appeared before the Committee of Public Accounts late last year I asked a colleague to put a question to him about handguns. I was struck less by what the Commissioner said than by the way he said it. He mentioned that it is a strange position for the Garda to be on the one hand licensing Glock pistols and on the other trying to take them out of the hands of criminals. His eagerness to answer the question struck me. There was almost a sense of relief in the room when he had the opportunity to deal with what I believe he believed to be an issue that was being allowed to get out of control.

It is worth considering the alternative to a ban on handguns and to passing this legislation. In four years there has been a six-fold increase in the number of legally held handguns, making a total of approximately 1,800. If we leave the licensing process as it is there could be 10,000 legally held handguns here over the next five years. I believe society does not want that. It is right to bring some practicality and reality into this debate. Yesterday, I visited the website of a gun dealer in Galway. This shop sells handguns on-line and over the counter. One can buy a Glock 17 for €701.89. The big seller is the Sig Mosquito at €361.49. Until now one did not need to be a member of a shooting club to get one of these Glocks or Sigs or other handguns. That will change with the commencement of aspects of the Criminal Justice Act 2006 in this legislation. Those who have argued against a handgun ban would have a hard time selling it to their constituents, if they showed them this price list.

Most people are not aware that these weapons are being sold in this manner and do not want them sold in this way. Those who argue that there is no handgun culture or that we are treating gun and shooting clubs harshly or who argue that people should have a right to buy and keep as many handguns as they please should explain how the increased proliferation of handguns and the liberalisation of the law would not harm society. The onus is on them to convince me, my colleagues, the Garda and the majority of the public how more of these weapons could possibly be of any benefit to anyone besides their owners.

I agree with the sentiment that we have arrived at this point not because of any public policy decision but because of legal challenges, court decisions which have had the practical effect, intended or not, of liberalising the laws relating to handgun ownership. That is why we need to provide clarity and deal with a situation that was never the objective, aim or purpose of this Legislature.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am pleased to have an opportunity to contribute to this Bill, which contains a hotchpotch of different provisions. It deals with the European arrest warrant, which was introduced some time ago, the Schengen information system, which brings our standards into line with some of those in other parts of Europe, and other miscellaneous provisions, particularly dealing with the amendment of legislation on handguns, knives and imitation weapons. It is a standard criminal justice Bill and has a bit of everything. Whether it is relevant to dealing with crime is another issue.

It is imperative that the House legislate relevantly and put in place measures that will achieve what we intend to achieve to protect citizens. The first sentence of the explanatory memorandum states:

The purpose of the Bill is to amend certain provisions of the Criminal Law which have been identified as requiring amendment in light of their operation since enactment, to update their provisions in line with current requirements in the operation of the criminal justice system and to give further effect to [various other decisions].

The extent to which the provisions we introduce are useful is the test of the legislation. We must be concerned about civil liberties and ensure there are sufficient safeguards in legislation of this nature.

My main concern is the implementation of criminal justice legislation. I have been spokesperson in this area for some time, including during the term of the previous Administration. I once described the former Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform as a serial legislator. He introduced legislation to be beat the band and the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform was effectively a factory for the production of criminal justice legislation. Of all the Departments, it produces the most. Given this enormous output of legislative proposals, we must ask whether we get the desired return in terms of implementation and product.

The most important Department in terms of determining the quality of people's lives is the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. It is concerned with anti-social behaviour and the environment in which people live and has an effect on whether people in their homes are safe from burglary and whether they can go out at night without being concerned that somebody is carrying a handgun or knife or is likely to carry out a physical assault. These issues are all concerned with the quality of life of the citizen. Unless it is protected, we are in serious trouble.

The provisions on handguns in the Bill have received the most scrutiny, in addition to the provision stipulating that firearms dealers should tax have clearance certificates. One would have believed the latter provision would not be necessary in a Bill at this time. The same applies to the provision that the importation of handguns can only be carried out by a registered firearms dealer. These are the sorts of provisions one would have expected would be in place and would not need updating. They should already be subject to the tightest legislation and everybody involved in any way with the firearms industry, be it by way of importing, selling or handling weapons, should be on a register. This is clearly not the case because if it were, we would not be amending the legislation now.

Handguns are the main type of weapon in use in recent times in Ireland. Their being readily available here means we can expect every criminal gang going out to rob and break the law, and individuals involved in burglaries, to be carrying a loaded weapon. That is the state of society at present. Some weapons have become available because of the importation of drugs. It is common to have guns in every major consignment of drugs. This development has probably been the most serious criminal development in this State since its foundation. We now have two deadly weapons being used against citizens. Drugs are being sold that are killing people all over the place. In my constituency there are communities that have been devastated by the sale of cocaine and heroin. At the same time there are deadly turf feuds taking place in Limerick and Dublin between various gangs and various elements of those gangs. Drugs and guns combine to create a cocktail of violence and damage in respect of which the authorities are not really in control.

In 2003, the great former Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Michael McDowell, told us the shooting dead of a criminal by another was the sting of a dying wasp and that he had the matter under control. That was six years ago but since then the number of fatalities and injuries associated with gun crime has increased. The quantity of drugs imported to and seized has also increased. This simply means that, despite the fact that the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform has been a virtual factory of legislation, we have not been able to get on top of serious crime, not to mention low-grade crime and anti-social behaviour. Young people are afraid to go out at night in certain urban areas. The authorities have not come to terms with either low-grade or very serious crime.

The real issue concerns how we come to grips with the problem and ensure the people involved in crime are brought to justice. We must ensure the State asserts itself as being in control such that we do not have any incidents such as those that were perpetrated by the Mafia in Chicago or the Bronx. We must not have any areas run by a Mafia in this country. Certain areas in the country are becoming ghettos and are controlled by criminal groups. The more this occurs, the more the respect for law and order will diminish and the citizen will be less secure.

The Government should have been dealing some time ago with the fact that dissidents from Northern Ireland are appearing on the streets of Dublin. There are pipe bombs, shootings and weapons. An overflow of weaponry from the North is evident here and violent behaviour spread across the Border after the peace process proved successful in the North. It is time to take a fresh look at the degree of decommissioning that has taken place. There is no doubt but that there are weapons in existence that should have been decommissioned as part of the peace process but which were not.

There are dissidents who have never moved away from their violent behaviour across the Border and who are now involved in criminal behaviour here. These people might have been outlaws, as it were, in their own organisations, operating to some degree independently. There is now quite an element of this type of activity, with dissident-type weapons and information on how to produce bombs increasingly appearing on the streets. The situation is getting worse all the time. The number of pipe bombs being discovered by the Garda, which the Army must be called in to deal with, is increasing. It is not just handguns and knives; it is now bombs. Many of them are not fully primed, but some of them are.

We must make every effort to get on top of this. Our biggest problem is that we never got on top of the drugs crisis. In the old days, when the drugs crisis was limited to Dublin and only heroin was involved, it was not taken seriously. Communities were left to rot before the authorities decided to take any action. For about 15 years - from 1979 to the early 1990s - heroin never moved out of Dublin. Only in the 1990s did it become available anywhere else in the country. During that period no serious attempt was made to stamp it out, which allowed communication networks to be established in other areas, and it has now spread like wildfire and is to be found in every urban area throughout the country.

The same thing happened with cocaine. There was no cocaine in the country at all until after that time, but now it has been channelled into the same distribution networks and is available everywhere in the country. This is because there is no task force in place and no plan to deal with the latest drug or weapon. Whether it is a crack-cocaine-style development or a pipe-bomb-type development, where is the plan to deal with these new innovations from the criminal side? There is none and, as a result, these innovations take off. They are not dealt with and then they become part of the criminal network. That is happening all the time. We are putting through legislation after the event which is ineffective in dealing with the matter.

To give one example of the lack of proper implementation and focus, I will mention something I raised in the Dáil a few days ago. Three weeks ago the people involved in the largest ever haul of drugs in the State, which was in the Ceann Comhairle's own neck of the woods, were convicted. Almost €500 million worth of drugs were seized, and the people involved got a mere ten years' sentence, which is strange, considering that is the minimum sentence for anyone who is caught with a small amount of drugs - €13,000 worth - or, under the amended legislation, €150,000 worth, depending on how one interprets it. Somebody who has been responsible for importing €450 million to €500 million worth of drugs should be subjected to a more serious penalty rather than the minimum prescribed. However, that was the decision of the judge in the case.

Another decision of the judge in that case was that the Garda was obliged to register those involved on the register of drug offenders when they were brought to prison. The Garda went out and tried to do this and, lo and behold, it could not find a register of drug offenders. Members will remember that one of the acts of the then Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, former Deputy Michael McDowell, was to pass in October 2006 a Criminal Justice Act that made provision for the establishment of a register of drug offenders. However, the Minister has never actually introduced this and the Garda Commissioner has not implemented that part of the law. There is no register of drug offenders. Here we are, talking in the House about how we are going to deal with serious criminality, yet when we pass legislation nothing happens. The three gentlemen who were sentenced are going to prison, but there is no register of drug offenders to put them on. They come out of prison and they can go anywhere in the world without being on a register.

I live in a constituency in which there is much criminality related to drugs. The Evening Herald, which is regarded very much as the local newspaper, will tell one that those involved are flitting across from Ireland to Spain to the Netherlands and around the country, or are operating within our jails with impunity and causing mayhem. Yet not a single one of them is on a register of drug offenders. How do they go abroad? It is unbelievable that we are not making a serious effort to curtail this in a serious operational fashion. When the Minister is summing up I hope he will give us some indication, three years down the road, of when we will have that register of drug offenders. We do have a register of sex offenders and the Garda is responsible for vetting that. There are many complaints about it not being tight enough. However, we do not even have a drug offenders' register. People who are convicted and whom the judges believe will be put on the register do not end up on any register. Perhaps there will be some action in this regard. Again, this highlights the lack of meaningful implementation of the law with regard to serious criminal matters.

Even in matters that do not require legislation, it is a question of implementation. The Ceann Comhairle, who was Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, knows that; we can pass all the legislation in the world but unless it is implemented it is a waste of space. Unimplemented legislation results in a lack of respect for legislation.

One of the latest developments introduced by the Minister of State at the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, Deputy John Curran, is an initiative called Dial to Stop Drug Dealing. This has been rolled out in three phases throughout the country, with a call centre in Manchester. There are many people who are afraid to go to the Garda because they cannot be seen doing so, particularly addicts who owe money and are under great pressure from drug dealers, and their families. They cannot go to the Garda station and they do not want a call to be traced. However, Dial to Stop Drug Dealing, which is an absolutely confidential telephone line, was established last September and has produced great results. The response I got from the Minister to a parliamentary question the other day was that 2,500 calls had been made and 700 of those had been acted on successfully by the Garda. That compares well to the Garda's own confidential line, which had only 3,500 calls in the course of the whole year, although it has been in place since 1992. I could not get figures on the amount it cost to keep the Garda confidential line in operation because I got the usual reply from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform that to compile the figures would cost too much in terms of resources and manpower. The cost of Dial to Stop Drug Dealing is minimal, and it is being rolled out in its third phase at present. However, by September the call centre is to be closed down. The entire project, which has proven successful and been of great benefit in disadvantaged communities where people cannot go to the Garda directly, is to be closed down. All the work that has been done by communities in putting posters up in public houses and providing beer mats with information on "Dial to Stop Drug Dealing", letting people know the law, counts for naught. Here is a successful project that is being knocked on the head. How much would it cost to keep that call centre open per month? Only €1,500. The funding comes from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs. I am making a plea that this useful weapon in the fight against drugs in disadvantaged areas not be terminated because of a paltry sum of money but that it be maintained in operation as part of an ongoing, mainstream approach to dealing with serious drug crime.

These issues must be addressed in the context of the legislation. I hope it succeeds but more then anything else, I hope to see existing legislation properly implement.

Joe Carey (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Bill, the main provisions of which are that no new licences will be issued for handguns with limited exceptions for Olympic sports. Any existing handgun licences will be subject to the new rigorous licensing procedures where renewal is sought and there will be a new three year licensing system for firearms. Also there will be amendments to the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003 and to the Bail Act 1997 and the Bill will permit the exchange of information through the Schengen information system when it is operational.

There is a philosophy to the firearms element of this legislation whereby the Minister, as he stated himself, does not want to allow a gun culture develop in this country. I personally agree with him on this; I do not want an Irish group to play a similar role to that played by the National Rifle Association in the United States, which determines public policy to a significant degree. That is a road I hope we never go down in this country. We have all witnessed the horrific scenes in the aftermath of school shootings in the United States. These tragic events have shaken the political system and have led to calls for more stringent gun control laws. The National Rifle Association, however, continues to oppose the introduction of such laws.

Having said that, and understanding the Minister's motivation, we run the risk with this legislation of missing the point we are trying to address. The firearm elements of this legislation are by and large directed towards the recording and administration detail required of legally held guns. The Bill reforms our laws on the matter of the possession of firearms but how this legislation may restrict the availability of weapons available to criminal gangs and organised crime is not really apparent. How the State effectively deals with illegally held firearms should be the fundamental part of this legislation. We clearly need more legislation to deal with illegally imported firearms. There is now an obvious direct link between the deeply rooted gang culture, the importation of drugs to finance this gang culture and the importation of weaponry tacked onto these drugs shipments. This is where the real problem lies.

Ireland's growing drug problem must be addressed. Cocaine was the drug or choice during the boom and continues to be widespread. Now, however, the deadly drug heroin is taking grip throughout this country. It is our responsibility and the responsibility of the Minister to do everything we can to protect the citizens of this State from the evils of drugs. We must ensure that everything that can be done is done to fight drug traffickers and drug dealers. We must cut their life-line, the supply of drugs. I also strongly believe that there should be an emphasis on access to drug treatment and services for those that develop a drug problem. There is a huge concern that in a time of economic downturn people will have greater recourse to drugs and the State needs to response accordingly to this

Since Operation Anvil in 2005, 2,200 illegally held weapons have been seized. Gardaí have also intercepted several shipments of heavy weaponry, including sub-machine guns, rocket launchers, and grenades. This would tend to indicate that significant numbers of illegally held firearms have been imported into the country. The CSO figures for illegal firearm possession charges show an upward trend from 373 in 2003 to 462 in 2008, an increase of almost 25%, again an indication that the illegal ownership of firearms is on the increase. There are no easy solutions to this deadly equation but I would be interested in the approach the Minister has to this specific issue.

Notwithstanding the Minister's desire to prevent a gun culture developing in this country, he must shift the balance in this legislation from those that legally hold firearms towards illegal aspects of firearm ownership. Mandatory reporting of loss or theft of any firearms or ammunition would be an essential element of legislation such as this. As has been stated already in this debate, there seems to be some confusion about stolen firearms and their subsequent use in crime. Any licensee who fails to report theft or loss could and should be subject on conviction by the courts to imprisonment or to a fine.

Another element which would redirect the balance of the legislation towards the illegal firearms would be a substantial increase on the penalty for possession of an unlawful firearm. My colleague, Deputy Charles Flanagan, has proposed a fine not exceeding €50,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years or both for this offence. These are tough penalties but they are unequivocal and reflect the seriousness of the issue.

The parts of this Bill that deal with knife crime introduce complexities. I appreciate it is almost impossible to ban the sale of knives that are used in any Irish kitchen, restaurant or butcher's shop. Having said this, there should be no need for such knives to be carried in public. The excuse that they are merely for kitchen or some other benign use when found on a person in public should quite simply not be tolerated and the punishment should reflect this. I am pushed to think of any reason whereby knives such as these would need to be on a person in public.

Acknowledgement in the Bill of the proliferation of samurai swords is also welcome. These weapons have become prevalent and are regularly used by today's criminals. Again, Deputy Flanagan has repeatedly raised this issue in this chamber. I therefore welcome the Minister's acknowledgement of the threats posed by samurai swords and support the provisions in the Bill that will address their use. I accept the Minister is trying to deal with and legislate for the growth of knife crime but I do not agree that enough is being done to enforce the law. According to the figures and statistics on knife crime, the number of murders committed where a knife was involved declined last year whereas the number of offences for possession of a knife increased dramatically. In five years offences relating to possession of offensive weapons, mainly knives, has increased by 72%, yet only 32% of cases have led to conviction. The question has to be asked, why the conviction rate is so low.

Some 30% of all knife crime offenders in this State are under 20 years of age. It is clear from this statistic that the State must respond by going to second-level schools with an educational programme aimed at stamping out this growing activity. The €200,000 allocated to the Minister, Deputy Dermot Ahern to raise awareness of knife crime has so far failed miserably. The Minister promised to raise awareness and thereby tackle the serious issue of knife crime by having a presence on social networking websites such as Twitter, Facebook and Bebo. I propose that the Minister involve community gardaí in this process. The Minister should send the message that carrying a knife will not be tolerated by this State. That message needs to get to our schools. It is vital that a strong coherent campaign would start as soon as possible to stamp out knife crime.

I welcome the fact that gardaí are no longer to spend so much time in the administrative duties associated with firearm licensing. The idea of rolling renewal for firearms licensing is also welcome. It has been my experience that gardaí in rural Ireland spend an inordinate amount of time checking legally held shotguns in the lead up to the duck hunting season at the start of September every year. There has to be a better use of Garda time than activity such as this. However, who does the Minister envisage will carry out this work?

In reading the excellent briefing paper supplied by the Oireachtas Library and Research Service one thought struck me about our proposed adoption of the Schengen Agreement. It is obvious that European law is more advanced on criminal activity. Article 99 of the Schengen Information System speaks of the use of "discreet surveillance". It is not that long since this House began the debate on surveillance as a tool in fighting crime. Is the Minister happy that our criminal justice legislation is robust and modern enough to participate in this pan-European approach to criminal activity?

The Schengen Agreement and its associated information system establishes police and judicial co-operation in criminal matters across Europe. Its objective as stated is, "preventing and combating crime, organised or otherwise, in particular terrorism, trafficking in persons and offences against children, illicit drug trafficking and illicit arms trafficking, corruption and fraud." The six defined reasons for which information can be entered on the Schengen Information System and the possibility of we in Ireland making use of a system such as this will be of benefit especially in our fight against organised crime.

I assume there will be significant costs associated with these elements of the legislation. These will relate to information technology, the dedicated overseers of this system, the DPP and the Data Protection Commissioner. Has the Minister costed this and can he give us an indication as to the amount of money that will be required to implement and run this service?

The elements of this Bill that deal with the introduction of the Schengen Information System are welcome. We have, to a certain extent, along with the UK, fallen behind this pan-European approach to intelligence and administrative work sharing in the field of courts and police. As we fell behind, it is ironic that our Irish criminal fraternity strengthened and developed their European links. These include holiday homes in Spain, importation of drugs and guns from continental Europe and, lately, shooting and target practice in Eastern Europe.

The sections of this Bill on the Schengen Information System provide an important step in the integration of European information systems into tools available to our Garda and State officials. However, I wonder how compatible our information systems are with the rest of Europe. When I read of this system, the dreaded PPARS or electronic voting comes to mind. I am sure the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform is also mindful of this. It provides our national authorities here with greater access to information. It also allows for more efficient dealing with criminal activity reflecting the new mobility of some of our criminal classes. I hope these elements will make it easier for us to deal with those Irish gangland members who leave the Irish jurisdiction. I welcome this part of the Bill.

I largely welcome this legislation but feel it needs more work on Committee Stage. There must be a clearer distinction, in that while the Minister wants to avoid the rooting of gun culture in Ireland, he cannot unduly impinge upon those who want to pursue a legitimate sport or pastime. We must not fall into the legislative trap of using a sledge-hammer to crack a nut. The elements of this Bill dealing with pan-European approaches to crime are long overdue and very welcome.

John Curran (Dublin Mid West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister has asked me to express his appreciation to Deputies from all sides of the House for their contributions to the debate on this Bill and for the constructive remarks which have been made on some of the proposals contained in this measure. On the comments on the firearms proposals made by Deputies Charles Flanagan and Rabbitte in their capacity as justice spokespersons for their respective parties, we thank them for their broad support for what is being proposed in this Bill. Control of firearms in the population generally cannot be other than a progressive initiative, and that appears to be the view of all sides of the House. Any society which is lax in its control of access to firearms is storing up trouble for itself.

Both Deputies Charles Flanagan and Rabbitte have pointed out that the firearms provisions of this Bill will not alleviate the situation regarding gangland crime. I have never claimed that these measures were intended to target gangland crime. This House will be aware of the many anti-gangland crime measures in place, including Operation Anvil, the focus of which is the disruption of serious, organised criminal activity. A sum of €21 million has been ring-fenced in the Garda budget for 2009 to ensure ongoing operations of Anvil continue to be undertaken by all units and sections of the Garda Síochána. The introduction of the Criminal Justice (Surveillance) Bill in the House very recently is another important initiative in the ongoing fight against crime. However, it is a matter of record that some legally held firearms are stolen. A total of 42 hand guns have been reported stolen since 2004. It stands to reason that they are stolen for a purpose which is likely to involve some form of criminal activity. It would be folly to suppose that the issue of legally held hand guns falling into wrong hands can be ignored.

The Government has also made it clear that its reasons for restricting hand guns are much wider. In particular, we have made it clear that we do not wish a hand gun culture to take hold here. Hand guns are different because they are easy to conceal, can often discharge a large number of bullets rapidly and feature so often in gun rampages. While a number of Deputies received representations from practical shooting enthusiasts, these are the views of the vocal minority and not representative of the views of the firearms consultative panel. Not all forms of target shooting activities are as legitimate and credible as they claim to be. For example, the United States Practical Shooting Association on its website advertises, "If shooting has an "extreme" sport, USPSA-sanctioned practical shooting is it."

The Oireachtas Library and Research Service, in the Bills digest produced for this Bill, referred to the combat-kill philosophy which underpins this activity and the shoot-no shoot decisions which clearly illustrate the combat ethos. Practical shooting is in bad taste. It is inherently an undesirable activity and a million miles removed from traditional target shooting. I remain very concerned at some of the activities and attitudes which have developed very quickly in this country following on from the licensing of handguns in recent years and this is one of them.

With the passage of this Bill, the law will be tighter. The Garda Commissioner will have the additional powers he needs to address matters relating to firearms licensing. It is the Government's belief that the promotion of undesirable shooting practices in recent years, which has created a demand for high powered hand guns, is not in the public interest and we do not want to let it continue.

In regard to Deputy Flanagan's comments on the ban on handgun ownership in the UK and its impact on crime rates, I will make the obvious observation that there has not been a second Dunblane since the ban. Any research on jurisdictions where access to handguns has been tightly controlled will show that such controls were introduced after a gun rampage. We do not want that kind of tragedy to occur here. Indeed, what is disturbing is how short-lived coverage of these gun rampages is now because they are so frequent.

As the Minister said, the firearms proposals in this Bill are primarily about the protection of public safety and the updating of the administrative and licensing arrangements for legally acquired firearms. Considering the serious consequences which could arise from anything less than a highly efficient administrative approach to the control of firearms in society, I do not believe any side of the House could object to the aims at the heart of this Part of the Bill.

I wish to address the query Deputy Flanagan raised in regard to the Minister's statement last November that he would review the licensing process annually. The Minister said at the time he would keep under annual review, in consultation with the Garda Commissioner, the outcome of the licensing procedure. If the outcome of that procedure leaves a situation which still poses an unacceptable risk to the community, he said he would use new powers, which the Bill would contain, to ban outright any type of firearm. The Deputy will be aware that these new powers are contained in section 25 which allows the Minister the power to declare certain firearms and ammunition as prohibited.

The provisions in the Bill concerning the operation of the European arrest warrant are designed to increase the efficiency of that system and to ensure greater co-operation between member states in regard to its operation. Crime, like many other activities in the modern world, increasingly has an international dimension. The House's broad welcome for these provisions is appreciated.

Turning to Part 2 of the Bill which contains amendments to the European Arrest Warrant Act, the following points arose in the debate. First, it should be pointed out that since the coming into operation of the European Arrest Warrant Act in 2004, this jurisdiction has received approximately 600 requests for arrest warrants from other states, 198 of which were received last year. In 2008, we issued 40 European arrest warrants which has resulted in the surrender of 13 individuals so far on foot of those warrants. Deputy Ó Snodaigh indicated his reservations about some of the proposals but if he reads the Minster's opening speech, he will note some of his concerns were addressed.

I will now deal with some of the issues raised by Deputies. Deputy Flanagan referred to Ireland's participation in the Schengen information system, SIS. As the Minister said, the original system is in the process of being upgraded. Work on the upgrade is being led by the EU Commission. It has not progressed as quickly as had been anticipated. I understand a number of technical problems have arisen. A timetable for implementation of the system will be decided at the Justice and Home Affairs Council in early June.

While Ireland's preparations are well in hand, further progress will be very much dependent on the decisions taken at the Justice and Home Affairs Council. The impact of those decisions on the Irish project, including the financial implications, will be assessed following the Council.

Deputy Ó Snodaigh asked why the Bill had not been referred to the Human Rights Commission. He expressed concern about the adequacy of human rights protection. It should be pointed out that there is no requirement to forward all Bills to the commission. In this case, the amendments are, in the main, of a technical or procedural nature and were not considered to warrant referral.

However, I would also draw Deputy Ó Snodaigh's attention to section 37 of the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003, which prohibits surrender where the person's rights under either the Constitution or the Convention on Human Rights would be breached. On any objective assessment, it is difficult to imagine what greater protection of human rights could be given.

The Deputy mentioned section 11 as a result of which the right to withdraw consent to surrender has been removed. There are strict requirements for the giving of consent. The judge of the High Court making the order must be satisfied that the consent is being given voluntarily and that the person fully understands the consequences of consenting and that the person had obtained, or was given the opportunity to obtain, legal advice before deciding to consent.

If the court is satisfied as to the giving of the consent, it must then consider whether the surrender of the person is prohibited under the Act or the framework decision - in other words, the requested person's consent cannot override the provisions of the Act and require the court to order surrender where this would be prohibited by the Act.

The comprehensive nature of the protections for a person consenting to surrender is such that the current provision which allows for withdrawal of consent right up to the steps of the aeroplane is no longer considered appropriate. Operational experience suggests that this particular provision has been availed of on vexatious grounds purely for the purpose of delaying surrender. The deletion of the provision in no way interferes with, or limits, any other legal rights of the person.

A further point raised by the Deputy on this section related to the restriction on the right of appeal. The restriction is similar to that contained in criminal justice legislation and again operational experience suggests the appeal process has been availed of on frivolous and vexatious grounds to delay or frustrate surrender.

Deputy Ó Snodaigh is also concerned with the provisions of section 10, in particular the possibility of a person being remanded in custody for a period of 14 days under the section. The section requires the person arrested to be brought before the court "as soon as maybe" after arrest and the matter is then the subject of judicial oversight. The Deputy will have noted the requirement for the person to be informed of the right to legal representation not only on arrest, but again on appearing before the court. The Deputy will also note that the remand is not automatically in custody but may be in custody or on bail at the court's discretion and, equally, it is not automatically for 14 days but for such period not exceeding 14 days as the court considers appropriate.

Deputy Ó Snodaigh also made some comments on the security of the SIS which exaggerate the actual position. Across all participating states, data security and access control are the highest of priorities. Each state must nominate a national supervisory authority to monitor the lawfulness of the use of, and access to, data held on the national SIS II database. The Deputy's statements in this regard are simply inaccurate.

In regard to Part 2, I intend to bring forward a number of further amendments to the 2003 Act on Committee Stage which will mainly be of a technical nature.

In regard to Deputies Flanagan's and Durkan's comments on the amendments in the Bill to the Bail Acts and in the system of bail as a whole, the question of the duration of any period of bail is always a matter for the courts and, to some extent, is related to the ordering of business in the courts. My Department keeps the law on bail under constant review and will continue to do so.

This Bill represents another legislative building block in the overall aim of improving and modernising our body of criminal legislation in this country. The fight against ever more sophisticated criminal activity is being undertaken on a range of fronts. The updating of our legislation to meet the current needs is but one of the weapons we must employ. It is with this in mind that I propose the measures contained in this Bill. I am grateful for the support it has been given by a significant number of Deputies who have made contributions to the debate.