Feargal Quinn (Independent)

I welcome the Minister. I intended to be critical of this Bill's long gestation, considering the report on the area was published in 1997. However, having heard the Minister speak on the Bill, I realise it is far better to have moved slowly and carefully with this legislation and its phased introduction.

The need for legislation in this area is now much greater, particularly as some criminals use private security as a facade for extortion. The establishment of make-believe services is one that has come to light in this debate. I was unaware until recently the degree to which this was influenced by the drug trade. In 1960 when I opened my first supermarket, I was responsible for using a similar facade. I discovered shoplifting was occurring and, as I did not know of such things as detective agencies, I invented my own. Little signs were placed around the store stating that the premises were guarded by the IDA, the non-existent Irish Detective Agency. I then received a warning from one security company that whoever the IDA were, they might be criminals. Mea culpa.

Going through a Swiss airport recently, I was stunned to see various kinds of surveillance equipment for sale. I understand this is illegal in many countries. However, sale of such equipment was permitted in the airport to those who would not use it in Switzerland. These included items such as pens and tape recorders that were hidden in furniture. However, technology is moving so fast that such items are obsolete, as surveillance can now be carried out from some distance. Whatever happens in the private security area, we must be protected against the abuse of such undetectable technology.

I am also impressed by the increased need for this legislation because of the criminal activity that exists in the industry.

Before I visited Baltimore in Maryland four or five years ago, a garda mentioned to me that he was familiar with some of the crime statistics for that city. I am not sure but I think he said there had been 365 murders the previous year, compared to 49 in Dublin. I do not want to be accountable for the exact numbers but think that is what I remember. When I walked around shopping centres in Baltimore, I was surprised that there were armed security people, most of whom were men, on the door of every shop, including boutiques, regardless of size. It was a reminder that we need a Bill to control the private security sector. We have no way of knowing who is responsible and what controls there are in that area.

I notice in the Bill that the strategic plans of the authority being established will be laid before both Houses. I would like to ensure everything, including the strategic plans, is made available to the public in order that we can investigate quite easily. I am not sure that I was able to check this. Senator Tuffy mentioned that a newspaper circulating in the area was being used. I hope technology such as the Internet and all other electronic means of communication will be used also. If we are to ensure the system works, we have to earn the confidence of the public and provide for the openness and transparency it demands of the authority and its plans, as well as of the security companies established.

The Bill which has been needed for a long time deserves to be supported. It will be needed to a greater extent in the future than in the past. I congratulate the Minister on introducing it and I am sure that he will amend it if it needs to be amended in any way. He has proved in the past that he is willing to consider and accept amendments. Although the Bill has not been initiated in this House, I am quite sure the Minister will listen to any amendments tabled by Senators.