John Minihan (Progressive Democrats)

I am pleased to contribute to this evening's debate. Growing concerns exist about the incidence of anti-social behaviour. The most worrying aspect is that the vulnerable are at the receiving end. I am particularly concerned for the elderly. Communities can be subjected to serious harassment, which can cause distress despite its not involving criminal offences. Standing up to offenders can be impossible for older or vulnerable people. Relief must be provided through the State. The heart of the debate concerns behaviour that is serious but not criminal and the role of the State in this matter.

I have no problem with the element of the Fine Gael motion which notes the growing public concern over the prevalence of anti-social behaviour. However, reality is ignored elsewhere in the motion. That is a pity because issues of public concern should be debated in the context of fact and reality. Those moving the motion would have the House believe the Government is failing to adequately resource the Garda. This should be rebutted. The Government has pursued a wise and multifaceted approach. The Garda Síochána Bill currently before the Oireachtas is the first comprehensive legislation to deal with policing in 80 years. For the first time, legislation provides for a reserve force and partnerships between the Garda and local authorities. Those moving the motion would also have us believe the Government is failing to address the issue of Garda numbers. The Minister clearly outlined to the House that the target for extra gardaí to which a commitment was made in the programme for Government will be met by late 2006. There is no doubt that the goal of recruiting over 1,100 gardaí every year between 2005 and 2007 will be reached.

Minor menaces, including the blaring of loud music or persistent late night interference from people walking down the street, may over time ruin individual lives without crossing the line to criminality. A mechanism is needed to protect the public from behaviour likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress. Many speakers referred to the ASBOs which were introduced in the UK. I welcome the acknowledgement of the need for ASBOs and the Government's proposal to introduce them. Amendments to the criminal justice legislation will introduce ASBOs into Irish legislation

The Minister pointed out that while these orders will be similar to those in operation in the UK, they will not be an exact replica. One of the key differences is that in this jurisdiction, only the gardaí will be able to go to court to secure an anti-social behaviour order. In the UK, the police and the local authorities can make such applications. We must take action against anti-social behaviour via the State and the gardaí are best placed to fulfil this role.

ASBOs are the key to dealing with behaviour that is serious but not criminal. The granting of such orders is a matter of civil law but a breach of an order is a criminal offence. An order, which can be in place for up to two years, can prohibit an offender from engaging in specific anti-social behaviour in a defined location. The breach of an ASBO moves the individual into the criminal realm.

It is interesting that some of those who are supposedly in favour of ASBOs are becoming proficient in denouncing their impact in the UK. The Minister referred to the House of Commons report in this regard. We hear much of the 30% of people in the UK who end up in the criminal system, but very little about the 70% who do not. It is a case of seeing the glass as half full or half empty.

A prominent claim in the UK is that one third of those served with an ASBO go on to breach it and then enter into the criminal system. Like all other measures designed to deal with social problems, ASBOs should not be considered in isolation. I draw Members' attention to section 29 of the Criminal Justice Bill. Some people have claimed that the introduction of ASBOs ——