Seanad debates

Tuesday, 26 July 2011

Criminal Justice Bill 2011: Second Stage.

 

3:00 pm

Photo of Paul BradfordPaul Bradford (Fine Gael)

I, too, welcome the Minister to the House. I refer to Senator O'Donovan's final comment on the implementation of existing law. I look forward to the Minister's response to the Senator's observations.

A huge premium is placed on the number of Bills the Seanad passes every year. Over the past two or three years in particular, a major complaint of Senators has been that they have spent much of their time discussing reports and making general observations instead of passing legislation, the reason being that legislation has not come from the other House. We, as politicians, must be careful in trying to strike the correct balance. It is not necessary for a parliament or country to pass legislation continually. Obviously, new laws are required in response to new circumstances but we should not be judged solely on the amount of legislation brought forward. We must ensure that laws that have been passed, not necessarily by the Minister but by his predecessors, are implemented to the full. It is in this regard that I look forward to the Minister's response to Senator O'Donovan's comments. We need to ensure time spent passing legislation results in every section and nuance thereof being utilised fully.

That said, I appreciate the urgent need for the Bill before us. I note it was published on Friday, 13 May. I presume that date will prove unlucky for some. I acknowledge the Minister wants the legislation implemented as soon as possible and will not be delayed by the House.

There is a view among the public that white-collar crime is not treated as seriously or vigorously as it should be. We debate all sorts of criminal offences in this House, including social welfare fraud, which is now a very popular topic, and our constituents complain to us that certain sectors of society are getting away with offences. White-collar crime is in this category. On foot of the Minister's vigorous efforts, the Bill will change this.

This legislation is being introduced at a time when our economy and society are struggling to recover from the banking crisis and economic difficulties caused by bad commercial decisions. It is appropriate that we try to put in place a mechanism that will ensure that we will set the highest possible standards for business and commerce, and that certain decisions, which sometimes verged on being criminal, particularly in the banking industry, will not be repeated. Economically, the country cannot afford a repeat of some of the dreadful decisions that were made. The Criminal Justice Bill 2011 is sending from the Government the strongest possible signal that not only better standards but also the highest standards of propriety will now be required.

I refer to a matter raised by Senator O'Donovan, that is, the investigative expertise of the Garda. The Bill is not designed to assist in the investigation of hit-and-run accidents, thefts in the local supermarket or even more serious crimes such as murder but will provide for, or assist with, very precise, intricate investigations. Will the Minister comment on the level of expertise?

For some years, there has been an embargo on recruitment. Is the Minister satisfied we have available the expertise for the specialised police investigations required to pursue these offences?

I very much support the main provisions of the Bill, which introduce changes to the suspension of detention periods. This is practical and should be of significant assistance. It is a common sense measure and we could ask why it has not been done previously.

The issue of withholding information is important. It is interesting to debate this section because we are beginning to comment on the withholding of information in many areas of society. In recent weeks, the Government discussed the Cloyne report and the withholding of sensitive information was very much at the core of its concerns. The Bill is removed from this area of concern, but the law on the withholding of information must be clarified and codified in a more strident fashion. I note what the Minister stated in this regard.

The law covering the provision of documentary evidence is very important given what the Minister is attempting to do in the Bill and the complex nature of what will be under investigation. We must place a strong onus on those persons obliged to provide paperwork and documentary evidence to do so in a way which will be at least not unhelpful and, it is hoped, helpful.

The provision of strong and tough law which people realise will be implemented is one part of the equation. The other part is that our emphasis must be to try to set higher standards. The country cannot recover, jobs will not be created, the economy will not be turned around and our younger people will not have a future unless business succeeds. We must aim to have the ethos and standards of business at the highest possible level. Our colleague, Senator Quinn, put in place a marvellous business which had the very highest standards. We must send out the message that commercial and business success can be achieved side by side with high standards. However, when these standards are broken measures such as this Bill will be required and must be implemented. We need the carrot and stick. This is not about penalising business. The House and the Government must support and encourage business, commerce and entrepreneurs. However, we must also have checks and balances and the Bill is appropriate in this regard.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.