Gerard Craughwell (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State, Deputy David Stanton, for coming to the House to outline his plans for the introduction and implementation of electronic monitoring. As he knows, section 102 of the Criminal Justice Act 2006 provides for the electronic monitoring of the restrictions of an offender's movements imposed by a court under section 101 of the same Act. To date, the section has not been commenced, but I understand electronic monitoring has been used by the Irish Prison Service to monitor offenders who have been granted temporary release from prison - for example, those who need to attend hospital as inpatients. I understand that approximately 50 prisoners were electronically monitored, with good success, under the pilot scheme. I am also aware that the electronic monitoring of offenders out of bail or post-conviction is a controversial issue that requires the balancing of society's need to reduce reoffending with the serious implications of removing or restricting a citizen's liberty.

I agree with the view of the Irish Penal Reform Trust that any interference with the rights of someone facing trial must be proportionate and justified. While I can appreciate these concerns, my research indicates that Ireland is very far behind the rest of Europe when it comes to electronic monitoring. Our approach has been extremely conservative and, at worst, completely behind the curve. Electronic monitoring has been used successfully for over 20 years in the United Kingdom and for over 30 years in Australia.

Last year the Criminal Justice (Burglary of Dwellings) Act 2015 was introduced. It targets repeat offenders with consecutive sentences and the option for bail to be denied. The Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Frances Fitzgerald, said she wholeheartedly agreed with this and that the burglary of a person's home was a heinous crime and traumatic for every victim. Furthermore, the high rates of recidivism and limited resources are causing havoc in communities. We know from statistics raised from An Garda Síochána's analysis service that 75% of burglaries are committed by 25% of burglars or offenders. I am joined in the Visitors Gallery today by Councillor Lynsey McGovern from Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown who is extremely concerned about the number of burglaries in Dublin's eastern Garda division which covers most of the southside. In 2016 the biggest increase was in the Dundrum area which saw a 25% rise. It is mirrored in other areas where highly organised gangs have replaced the casual opportunist burglar.

While the 2015 Act is bound to be effective and to be welcomed as a disincentive to committing multiple burglaries, it relies entirely on the punishment model.While I agree with the importance of keeping burglars off the streets, the rehabilitative aspect of a custodial sentence must not be ignored. The Tánaiste, Deputy Fitzgerald, is on record as stating: "Monitoring of a convicted offender's movements, whether by electronic means or otherwise, does not provide a focus on rehabilitation in the same way that supervision does nor does it provide the security of a prison sentence in preventing further offences."

I believe it does not have to be an either-or scenario and that the combination of the electronic monitoring of burglars and habitual offenders while out on bail and post-conviction, with strong support services, offers a viable solution. Research shows that where electronic monitoring is developed with high levels of support from probation and other services, the rate of re-offending can be greatly reduced.

I acknowledge that electronic monitoring is an expensive process but technology is developing at speed. When I walked down Grafton Street at lunch time today, I received several notices on my mobile phone informing me of the various retail outlets and what they had on offer. We are all being monitored at some level and surveillance systems now can greatly strengthen the system of bail and streamline the monitoring of those awaiting trial.

Electronic monitoring has been described as a force multiplier. In times of greatly reduced Garda numbers and the closure of Garda stations, this is to be welcomed. I ask the Minister of State to ask the Department, the Tánaiste, Deputy Fitzgerald, and in terms of his own influence, to give serious consideration to widespread use of electronic monitoring as a disincentive and rehabilitative measure in the case of burglaries, sex offences and other serious crimes. I look forward to the Minister of State's response.