Martin Mansergh (Fianna Fail)

I welcome the Bill and welcome the Minister of State and his officials to the House. The Minister, who was in the Chamber earlier, is someone who finds himself in the wars quite frequently. However, regardless of what one's views of his wider political role may be, we are fortunate to have an effective, capable and energetic Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. I have full confidence in him in that capacity, and I believe this is also true of the great majority of the members of my parliamentary party.

Any Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has, in some ways, the Sisyphean task of rolling the stone up the hill, only for it to roll back down again. However, American experience has shown that it is possible to achieve greatly reduced crime rates. Members should neither understate nor exaggerate Irish crime levels. Some ten or 12 years ago, before the murder of Veronica Guerin, and particularly in what one might call liberal, or left-leaning circles, there was a fashion to suggest that the incidence of crime was vastly overstated and that far more important problems existed, mainly of a social character. Equally, I deprecate wild overstatement and exaggeration. While this mainly occurs in the media, sometimes it happens in the Oireachtas. It takes the form of headlines such as "Country in State of Anarchy", which is far from the truth.

All Members know that considerable regional and social variations exist as far as the incidence of crime is concerned. In many areas, while the main problems are social disorder, drugs and vandalism, thankfully there is relatively little of what one might call serious organised crime. Obviously, not all the solutions lie within the remit of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and social measures are needed to address deprivation. Moreover, civic education can play an important role in enabling people to see more clearly the futility of engaging in a life of crime and of spending large parts of the best years of their life incarcerated.

When one considers past debates on this issue, I was glad to note the Minister's statement to the effect that 90% of interviews are now videotaped. This greatly reduces the chances of abuse, or of allegations of abuse, during interrogation. The Minister also referred to advances in respect of DNA sampling. As I have a daughter who is involved in genetics, I have a certain interest in the subject. Such advances have certainly enabled the solving of many crimes, especially murder, which could not have been solved in the past. Moreover, they have enabled cases to be reopened.

I welcome the provisions in respect of witness statements which are contradictory or withdrawn. There was a well known case, pertaining to the murder of Detective Garda McCabe, in which a key witness retracted his testimony. With proper safeguards, this will constitute an important advance in preventing a court from being left helpless, but instead being able to come to some judgment on the matter.

The Minister is right to stiffen the penalties for firearms offences. There are far too many guns around and people must be made aware that being found in possession of a firearm for the purposes of committing a crime or threatening people will be dealt with severely. The amnesty offered is of a limited and qualified character and will not absolve anyone of crimes which have already been committed.

I was obliged to smile a little when the Minister, in an unscripted comment, referred to how minimum mandatory sentences in respect of drugs cases were being applied in 20% of cases at present. There is something odd about mandatory sentences which are only applied by the courts in one case out of five. The courts should apply the law, and discretion, which must be provided for, should be used in exceptional cases. However, it is difficult to define four out of five cases as being exceptional. It suggests there is considerable resistance within the Judiciary in this regard. However, although the Judiciary is independent in its exercise of its functions, it is not independent of the law. Its job is to apply the law, regardless of whether judges agree with it.

I refer to the detention of children. Again, there has been a debate between what one might call liberals on one side and those who are more oriented towards law and order on the other, as to whether children in detention should be the responsibility of the Department of Education and Science, with an accent on remedial work, or of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. However, educators and teachers properly point out that it is not their responsibility to keep people in custody. Hence, the decision is a pragmatic one.

There has been much controversy in Ireland and in Britain in respect of ASBOs. One frequently hears, particularly from penal reformers, that it is wrong to incarcerate people for less serious offences. If that is the case, one requires a remedial system and ASBOs appear to provide a good solution in this regard. Summary sentences whereby on-the-spot fines are paid apply to road traffic offences. There is no reason these and other measures which reduce costs and bureaucracy should not be extended to certain types of social disorder. Everybody gains through having a more expeditious system.

I have doubts about the provisions on fireworks. We have not solved this problem. Every Hallowe'en fireworks go off all over Dublin and every other city. I am sceptical as to whether it is possible to enforce a ban or penalties on fireworks. In many other countries they are neither banned nor penalised. I accept that public opinion prefers that they are banned as if they were freely and legally available they might be used in uncontrolled situations.

I do not know whether licensing should be introduced. I do not like the existence of bans which are not enforced and are unenforceable. That does not necessarily mean one should have a free-for-all. I do not know what is the precise solution. It requires more thought.

Towards the end of his speech, the Minister discussed penalties for assaults. We would all warmly welcome severe penalties for attacks against firemen and ambulance crews. Such attacks are unconscionable. A similar matter is the throwing of stones or rocks at trains and perhaps at buses. Should the glass break and hit somebody it could cause seriously injury or possibly even kill. I recommend to the Minister that he take a serious view on this and consider penalties. Last week, a rock hit a train in which I travelled. Constant complaints are made about housing estates on the outskirts of Limerick and places such as Carrick-on-Suir through which trains travel. The Minister should address this problem and consult with Iarnród Éireann.