Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)

I move amendment No. 1:

To deleted all words after "Seanad Éireann" and substitute the following:

"—recognises that the Children Act 2001 is a modern and progressive statute which provides a wide range of interventions for young offenders in line with its major principles of diversion, restorative justice and detention as a measure of last resort and:

—commends the Government on the measures taken to date to implement key provisions of the Children Act 2001 and notes with satisfaction the commitment to implement the remaining provisions of the Act in a co-ordinated manner and on a phased basis as envisaged at the time of its enactment;

—welcomes the additional staffing and other resources provided to the probation and welfare service in recent years to implement the Children Act 2001;

—acknowledges the significant progress made in implementing the Children Act 2001 through the establishment of the Special Residential Services Board and the development of the child protection and family support services in the health sector;

—notes the bringing into force of all the restorative justice provisions of the Children Act 2001 and welcomes the commitment of the Garda authorities and of the probation and welfare service to the effective implementation of these provisions;

—welcomes the current youth justice review and the consequent intention to restructure the youth justice system to improve the delivery of services in the area and to strike the right balance between the rehabilitation of young offenders and the essential protection of the community;

—commends the Government on the wide range of social inclusion measures put in place to tackle such areas as crime, drugs misuse and educational disadvantage, which have a positive impact on children at risk of offending and on young offenders; and

—commends the Government's decision in October 2004 to expand the strength of An Garda Síochána to 14,000 members to tackle crime generally in line with its commitment in An Agreed Programme for Government and congratulates the Minister and the Garda Commissioner for the significant progress to date in implementing the project plan to ensure that this target is achieved."

I welcome the debate on this motion. Having listened to Senator Tuffy, I too saw "The Shawshank Redemption". It is a popular film which gave an insight into the failure of the system to rehabilitate people at a younger age rather than have them incarcerated for life. I listened to the RTE crime correspondent, Mr. Paul Reynolds, on radio recently speaking about some of the more serious incidents that have occurred recently. He made the point that those involved in serious crime are now second and third generation families who have graduated from relatively minor crime to become some of the most serious criminals in society. That underlines the need to endeavour to arrest that type of behaviour at an early stage and breaking that generational cycle should be a main priority of our efforts in this regard. He said that when people graduate to serious crime it is a question of either catching them in the act or getting somebody into the witness protection system because of the sophistication of the crime lords. In all of this it is important to stress the important role and responsibilities of parents. Many of the difficulties encountered, not in all cases, are due to the lack of quality parenting which allows youngsters to get into positions where they develop and follow a career in crime, spending their life in and out of prison, rather than worthwhile work and have, perhaps, a much more fulfilling existence. As we have seen recently some lose their lives as a consequence of their involvement in crime.

In regard to the Children Act 2001, referred to in the motion and in the amendment, much of it has been implemented but some sections remain to be implemented. Senator Tuffy suggested raising the age of criminal responsibility from seven to 12 years. While that is obviously desirable it is still outstanding. We have to bear in mind that we have seen headline instances where serious crime was committed by people at a very young age. Obviously there has to be provision to ensure it is avoided, if at all possible, but if it happens that they are taken and held to account and that every effort is made to ensure when they are released from detention subsequently that they will not recommit the crime. Rehabilitation has to be a major plank in all of this, particularly in the juvenile area.

The Springboard initiative, which is very much part of the overall family support mechanisms that were introduced, has a very significant role to play. It offers a range of interventions, including individual work, group work, peer work, family work, advice and practical help. In this regard it has potential to provide education for juveniles in detention allowing them to develop skills.

However, we need to go further. I know that job placement is envisaged in some programmes and is a very important component. The first problem facing people leaving prison is how to reintegrate into society. Getting accommodation and obtaining a job are key in this regard. As part of that overall effort the Minister of State should consider giving tax or other employment benefit incentives to employers to encourage them to take on a number of juvenile offenders, thus giving them a chance. They would then be monitored by the juvenile liaison system to assist in reducing the number who re-offend.

We need an holistic approach. The Children Act envisages taking such an approach. Youth advocate programmes also address the protection of children. The family welfare conferences will now form part of the system and when they go to court a judge will have a range of options to try to ensure that the offender has an opportunity to participate fully in normal life. The community sanctions include day-centre orders, probation training or activities, intensive supervision, residential supervision, family support and restrictions on movement. Many of these have been implemented and some are awaiting implementation. They will assist youngsters who find themselves on the wrong path to find the right path in future.

I understand it is proposed that the child detention schools are to become the responsibility of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform rather than the Department of Education and Science. It is important that the focus on education and acquiring skills should not be diluted by the transfer. The transfer could be beneficial if all the other interagency structures, which are being introduced, are integrated so that they all focus on the objective of achieving a better opportunity in life for those who unfortunately find themselves in such a situation. We also need to introduce parental responsibility and accountability into the system.

Ultimately the responsibility for children should rest with parents. If parents through negligence or lack of interest are seen to represent a strong contributory factor to youngsters going into crime, they should be required to pay a price. This would place an onus on parents to act responsibly and ensure their children are brought up as good members of society. While this area needs some more attention, overall we are heading in the right direction and I know the Minister of State will be anxious to accelerate the implementation of all these provisions.