David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I am taking this Private Members' Bill on behalf of the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Charles Flanagan, who, unfortunately, must be in the Dáil at this time. I thank Senator Swanick and the other proposing Senators for bringing the Bill before the Seanad and highlighting the consequences that can result from vandalism to life-saving equipment.

Having listened to previous contributions, I agree with colleagues that this is important legislation and it is even more important that we are debating it. I wonder about the mindset of people who vandalise and damage life-saving equipment.I wonder whether it is a case that they do not care, they do not know or perhaps they know but are doing it on purpose. Whatever the reason, this is extraordinarily serious. This is why the debate is so important.

As Senators have pointed out, the purpose of the Life Saving Equipment Bill 2017 is to introduce a specific offence of interfering with, causing damage to, altering, removing or modifying life-saving equipment such as defibrillators and marine safety devices. The Bill proposes to introduce a custodial sentence, for conviction on indictment, of up to five years for such an offence with a financial penalty of up to €50,000. The spirit and intention behind the Senator's Private Member's Bill is clear, namely, to send a clear message to individuals contemplating thoughtless acts of vandalism. Perhaps it is a thoughtless act of vandalism. If it is a planned act of vandalism that is even worse. If people were to realise that by damaging this equipment and putting it beyond use, they could be contributing to a person's death. That is the seriousness of their actions.

I join with Members who have mentioned the various voluntary services, and Senator Swanick mentioned Rescue 116 and what happened after the event. The volunteers in bodies such as the RNLI, mountain rescue, Civil Defence and first responders take their lives in their hands to save others as do the staff in the Naval Service, An Garda Síochána, the Air Corps, the Irish Coast Guard, lifeguards and so on. These people are working to save lives and one can see the effort they put into it.

In my own area, members of the east Cork rapid response medical group very often they risk their own lives to save others. It beggars belief that somebody would damage equipment on purpose. I cannot comprehend that anyone would damage equipment on purpose. I join with colleagues who speak of the need to change the mindset and the importance of education programmes in that regard. I commend Deputy Swanick for bringing this Bill before us today. This debate is important as it may help to change the mindset of those who either mindlessly or on purpose damage this equipment. I notice some of the media have taken on this issue as well, which is welcome.

The Minister has asked me to set out the law on criminal damage and theft. The offences which the Bill seeks to create are already provided for in legislation which deals with criminal damage and theft in a general way. The Criminal Damage Act 1991, referred to by Senator Swanick, deals with criminal damage to property generally, providing for a range of offences with significant penalties and this would include not only the life-saving equipment to which the Bill refers, but all life-saving equipment. Under the 1991 Act it is an offence to damage, threaten to damage or possess anything with intent to damage property. "Property" is defined in the broadest terms as meaning "property of a tangible nature, whether real or personal, that is capable of being stolen". The term "to damage" is also broadly defined as meaning "to destroy, deface, dismantle or, whether temporarily or otherwise, render inoperable or unfit for use or prevent or impair the operation of" the property concerned.

Section 2 of the 1991 Act provides that a person who, without lawful excuse, intentionally damages any property belonging to another or is reckless as to whether any such property would be damaged, is guilty of an offence. It also provides that a person who, without lawful excuse, intentionally damages any property or is reckless as to whether any property would be damaged and who intends by that damage to endanger the life of another or is reckless to such endangerment, is guilty of an offence. This latter provision has particular relevance in the context of damage to life-saving equipment. The commission of serious offences under the 1991 Act could, on conviction on indictment, result in a fine of €22,220 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years or even life imprisonment where endangerment of life is concerned.

As to the theft of property, the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act 2001 provides, in section 4, for a broad offence of theft which would include not only the life-saving equipment provided for in the Bill but all life-saving equipment. The Act states: "A person is guilty of theft if he or she dishonestly appropriates property without the consent of its owner and with the intention of depriving its owner of it." It is important to note that deprivation includes temporary deprivation. The penalty for conviction on indictment is an unlimited fine or imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years. Senators will agree that there is already in place legislation of a general nature which would enable prosecution of those who would seek to vandalise life-saving equipment as provided for in this Bill.

This Private Members' Bill would put in place specific offences regarding defibrillators and marine safety devices. If the Bill, as drafted, were enacted, it would mean that persons interfering with or damaging defibrillators or marine safety devices would be prosecuted for those specific offences and could potentially receive substantially lower penalties than would apply under current law. I know that is not the intention of the Bill. It has been mentioned by Members that these issues can be examined further on Committee Stage.

It is clear that the Senator's Bill arises from concerns that lives could be lost due to the interference with or damage to the life-saving equipment provided for in the Bill and that such acts should not go unpunished. In this regard, this House can have no doubt of the Senator's sincere motivation in bringing forward his Bill. Again I thank the Senators for bringing it forward.

I will now turn to the provisions of the Bill. As Senators have already outlined, section 1 of the Bill defines the terms used in the Bill. Section 2 provides for offences of interfering with, causing damage to, altering, removing or modifying a defibrillator or any marine safety device, except in the performance of routine testing or maintenance or during an identifiable medical emergency which has been notified to the emergency services. Section 3 sets out the penalties for such offences of a fine not exceeding €50,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years, or both, for conviction on indictment.

Section 4 applies section 14, an attachment order, and related sections of the Fines (Payment and Recovery) Act 2014 to any person found guilty of an offence under this Bill. However, the Minister believes this provision to be unnecessary. The provisions of the fines Act apply in circumstances where a fined person fails to pay a fine imposed by the due date for payment. In such cases, the fined person will be brought before the court again and the court will either make a recovery order, an attachment order, a community service order or, and as a last resort, commit the person to prison.

There are also some drafting difficulties with this Bill. The offences the Bill proposes regarding interfering with life-saving equipment are subject to the exception that the offences would not apply in the performance of routine testing, or maintenance of the equipment, or during an identifiable medical emergency which has been notified to the emergency services. This would mean that a person who, for example, throws a lifebuoy to a person without that person or some other person first notifying the incident to the emergency services would be guilty of an offence. That said, these are drafting issues and drafting issues can always be resolved. I just point this out to be helpful.

In conclusion, I thank Senator Swanick and the other proposing Senators once again, on behalf of the Minister, for their continuing work and interest in criminal justice matters. While the wide-ranging nature of the existing legislative provisions include life-saving equipment, the Minister and I believe that it is worth considering whether the law should be more explicit and focused in this regard or whether different penalties should apply where life-saving equipment is concerned. The Minister does not, therefore, propose to oppose the Bill but will explore options to give effect to the principle underlying the Private Members' Bill and will seek to work with Senator Swanick and the other proposing Senators in this regard. We want to see what we can do to progress the ideas that Senator Swanick and the other proposing Senators have outlined in the Bill to see how we can improve it. The over-riding concern is that we ensure we change the mindset of people.

The difficulty is providing proof because very often people interfere with equipment when there is nobody around to see it. Senator Grace O'Sullivan said that when one walks out in the morning everything is fine but when one walks back in the evening the damage has been done. I call on people who see somebody damaging equipment to please notify the authorities. It is incumbent on everybody to let it be known to the authorities if they can identify the person damaging the equipment. By doing that, one is saving lives. Senator Grace O'Sullivan mentioned ringbuoys.iein her contribution and I was very taken by what seems like a very interesting website. I think we should look at it further.

I thank Senators Jerry Buttimer, Brian Ó Domhnaill, Keith Swanick, Grace O'Sullivan, Martin Conway and Kieran O'Donnell who contributed. We are all of the same mind. The intention behind the Bill is good, but it needs to be worked on. I thank the Senators for bringing this Bill forward.