Brian Hayes (Fine Gael)

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this Bill. The Bill is welcome, but it is long overdue. It was first proposed in 2004 in a much shorter form. Since then, the Government has failed to bring it forward in either House and that is a shame. It has been amended radically and the new Bill is a totally different animal to the Bill as originally drafted in 2004. This is largely due to the fact that the Government was caught napping when a series of gangland killings in this city led to a crescendo of public anger about gangs and gang membership. Provisions for dealing with this issue are now being swiftly put through the Oireachtas. I welcome the fact that the Bill is before us, but it is two years overdue. It does not say much for the parliamentary process that it has taken such a long period of time for the Bill to be prioritised.

I had a great sociology teacher in Professor Michael McGréil, a Jesuit sociologist who was a great defender of the west of Ireland. At the start of a course on the sociology of crime, I remember him saying that it is very easy to be liberal if one is rich, but much more difficult if one is poor. One's disposition to crime and law and order very much depends on where one lives, the circumstances under which one grew up, and one's parents' and family's disposition to law and order. The demand for many of the proposals in the Bill, which Senator O'Toole called quite right wing in nature, is coming from poorer communities. By and large crime affects poorer communities in this city more than the more affluent ones. There is a demand in working class communities that a tough stance is taken and followed through, not just in law and regulations, but also in the enforcement of the law by the Garda Síochána. I reiterate something I have said in this House in the past. What would make the biggest difference in beating the scourge of crime in this country and particularly in this city would be to change radically the Garda recruitment policy by encouraging more children from working class communities to join the force. A bad attitude exists between members of the force and those communities and vice versa. We need to change radically the way we recruit young men and women into the force from these communities in order to change the attitude to crime and law and order.

Law can make a difference in terms of changing social conditions. When Veronica Guerin was murdered ten years ago, the swift enactment of three pieces of legislation by the then rainbow Government, with the support of the then Opposition parties made a difference. Those involved in gangland crime in the city fled the country overnight. Much of the proceeds of their criminal empire was seized by the Criminal Assets Bureau and much of the property they had illegally amassed was put to one side and used by the State. That is an example where the law made a difference. While it is an appalling admission to make in a democracy, it required the high profile murder of an innocent journalist to allow the Legislature implement what was draconian legislation. All the voices that traditionally would have opposed such legislation were understandably silenced by the circumstances of that appalling murder. Law can make a difference. It made a difference ten years ago in the immediate aftermath of the murder of Veronica Guerin. However, unfortunately no concerted effort was made to deal with the new generation of gangland criminals who took the position of the older elements in their organisations, who went to Holland, the south of Spain and elsewhere.

The new generation in control of the gangs in this city is more ruthless, amoral and vicious. They will shoot a person as quickly as they would look at him or her. Unfortunately the considerable progress that was made ten years ago with political consensus has been lost during the intervening time. Unfortunately the gangs are now running amok in this city. I congratulate the Garda Síochána for yesterday's very extensive seizure of drugs and guns in Limerick city. We need to see more such action.

The well-to-do members of our society have a particular responsibility. They have amassed huge sums of money in recent years, and choose to have cocaine parties on Friday and Saturday nights in their own houses and apartments. Their actions are fuelling the gun crime culture that has taken root here. They need to ask themselves serious questions. Their actions are directly linked to much of the murder taking place on the streets of Dublin. As Senator O'Toole said earlier, if we think heroin is bad, we should just wait until we see the generational impact of cocaine and crack cocaine. There can be no tolerance of designer drugs. There can be no tolerance of the notion that an element of the country living in a well-to-do part of the city can be tolerated because they do it in their swanky apartments away from the streets. That activity is leading to the criminalisation of an entire group and poorer people pay the price.

I welcome that section 73 deals with gang membership, a proposal my party made some time ago. The Minister has said it would be difficult to enforce. However, we must break down the kind of loyalty that some of these gangs have managed to engender in parts of the city through control, intimidation and fear. Although they live in areas away from where they came, they still manage to engender a Mafia-type loyalty in more working class communities. We must address that and ensure that the laws are enforced.

The law clearly sets out the prescribed sentence for possession of drugs with a value in excess of €10,000. I respectfully suggest to the judges who must deal with these cases that it is a matter of annoyance and concern to the Legislature that in one case in five, the minimum mandatory sentence for possession of more than €10,000 worth of drugs is not being enforced. If the Legislature sets out a clear sentence, judges have a responsibility to enforce that law. Where there is a breach of what is set out in law we need to understand the individual judge's reasons for doing so.

Much more could be said on this extensive Bill. I support what the Minister is attempting to do with ASBOs. The Dublin South-West constituency is bedevilled with a problem of certain groups of kids who are out of control, which largely relates back to their parents. Section 161(4) refers to a meeting that might be held at the instigation of the superintendent or inspector and states:

The following persons shall be asked to attend a meeting convened under subsection (1):

(a) the child;

(b) his or her parents or guardian;

(c) the member of the Garda Síochána who warned the child in relation to his or her anti-social behaviour;

(d) if the child is already participating in the Programme, a juvenile liaison officer.

There should be no question of asking parents or guardians to attend such a meeting, they should be obliged to do so. The Education (Welfare) Act makes far more compelling provisions, whereby if a child misses 19 days at school, the parent must be directly accountable. If a child puts a brick through a window or is deliberately involved in intimidating an elderly person or a young mother on her own with three children, there should be a direct responsibility on the parent or guardian of the child to attend in person with the superintendent or other Garda officer. I will speak more about this matter when we reach Committee Stage. We have an obligation not only to put the law in place but also to enforce it.

The law must also be clear about obligations in terms of parental responsibility. We cannot blame society, the Garda or the environment in which one lives for everything. The vast majority of the people who live in poorer areas raise their children impeccably. It is the responsibility of the State to ensure that the minority who fail to discharge their duties start taking their responsibilities seriously.