Fidelma Healy Eames (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State to the House. I am delighted to welcome this Bill, which represents a timely and appropriate response to the increased incidence of burglaries of dwellings. That is not to say it is the ideal solution. In fact, nobody knows what the ideal response is to this very serious issue. The explanatory memorandum to the Bill notes that the recidivism rate for persons convicted of burglaries and related offences is 80%. There must always, of course, be a presumption of innocence until a person is proven guilty in any criminal prosecution but, as Senator Barrett observed, there is cause for serious concern when a person comes before the courts who has 94 previous convictions. Will consideration be given to setting an above-the-bar figure beyond which a person will not be granted bail? I ask the Minister of State to address that suggestion in his response.

I support the measures in the Bill in regard to consecutive sentencing. However, the issue I am most concerned about is the impact of these crimes on victims. I do not claim criminal justice as a specialism of mine but I do understand the trauma that is visited on people when these things happen to them. At the time I moved to Oranmore in the mid-1990s, a local man in his mid or late 60s was murdered during the course of a burglary. That represents the nth degree to which these types of crimes can escalate. Such is the trauma visited on people that they often do not feel safe in their homes and end up living in fear. This is especially so for older people, whose confidence may be taken away forever.

On Monday night I heard about the number of break-ins in Clarinbridge, in Maree in Oranmore, where I live, and also in the Newcastle area of Galway city and in Portumna. We need to tackle the root causes of this type of crime and implement measures to make it very unattractive to potential criminals. Senator Brennan spoke about hitting these people where it hurts. There certainly is a case for reviewing social welfare entitlements, for instance, in such cases. I am conscious, however, without in any way wishing to justify criminal activity, that if we penalise people to the degree that we put them on the bread line, they might be driven to burgle out of necessity. I was involved in a study on early school leaving in the course of which we interviewed a number of young prisoners. Many of them, particularly the female prisoners, spoke about growing up in an environment of abuse, illiteracy and drug addiction and with family members who spent time in prison. The only way they could survive that environment was to burgle. It is a major societal issue at that level. None of that is reflected in the Bill, although I acknowledge the inter-agency approach to which Senator Bacik alluded.

On the other hand, if the sanctions and penalties are too weak and if offenders know they will get away with it, they will continue to engage in criminal activity. We know there is a culture of crime in certain areas and within certain families. That is part of the bigger picture and it needs to be tackled through the education and juvenile justice systems. I agree with Senator Mullins about the need to have a visible Garda presence. We need more community gardaí and more regular patrols. At the same time, there are steps people can take to reduce the likelihood of burglary and keep themselves safe. The text alert system is very good and is in operation where I live, in Maree. Having alert neighbours is better than having any number of gardaí on patrol. People who are at home on a regular basis notice unfamiliar vehicles and unusual activity in their area. People also need to be careful when it comes to social media usage. Young people, in particular, tend to advertise their location at any point in time. That gives very valuable information to smart burglars. I agree that a good dog is a great asset. I have one at home and it does make a difference in terms of making one feel safer.

I will conclude with a few questions for the Minister of State. Based on the evidence, what is the best sanction or penalty to prevent criminal recidivism and rehabilitate offenders? We need to work with offenders to help them see the impact of their crimes and ensure they do not want to do the same again. Second, what is the Garda Síochána seeking in terms of additional resources and supports to tackle this problem? I am presuming they have sought such assistance. Finally, will the Minister of State consider provisions to withdraw access to bail for repeat offenders after they have been convicted of a certain number of burglary offences?Is there a means of tagging offenders above a certain number of burglaries?