Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 38: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if his attention has been drawn to recent concerns voiced by the chief executive of Barnardos UK with regard to the routine use of anti-social behaviour orders in the United Kingdom (details supplied); the assurances he will provide that anti-social behaviour orders will be used as a measure of last resort if introduced here; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15698/06]

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have recently brought forward proposals concerning anti-social behaviour, including anti-social behaviour orders, as Committee Stage amendments to the Criminal Justice Bill 2004.

The Deputy refers to the concerns expressed by the chief executive of Barnardos UK regarding the alleged routine use of anti-social behaviour orders for children in that jurisdiction.

I assure the Deputy that in formulating my proposals I have examined the UK law and its application closely. I have worked closely with my colleague, the Minister of State with responsibility for children, Deputy Brian Lenihan, in preparing my proposals. The Deputy will be aware that, unlike the position in the UK, the proposals Deputy Lenihan and I have brought forward will establish separate arrangements with regard to adults and children. This ensures that elements are included in the arrangements pertaining to children that are appropriate to their circumstances and needs.

While the UK approach is considered to have provided welcome relief to many communities I am aware that it has been the subject of some criticisms, in particular that anti-social behaviour orders have been used in inappropriate cases. Having regard to these criticisms, the proposals to be included in the Criminal Justice Bill do not follow the UK model in many respects. In particular the proposals, in the case of both adults and children, incorporate a range of safeguards to ensure that anti-social behaviour orders will only be sought as a last resort. The definition of anti-social behaviour is designed to ensure that the orders are used to meet the real and serious needs of communities. Only the Garda Síochána, of at least superintendent rank, will be empowered to apply to the courts for orders, whereas in the UK, local authorities may also apply. Before the making of an application for an order may be considered, there will first be an explicit duty to formally warn a person to cease the offending behaviour, which is not the case in the UK. The court will be able to grant legal aid in appropriate cases and may only grant the application if it considers an order is a reasonable and proportionate remedy. The orders will operate for a maximum of two years, unlike the UK where they operate for a minimum of two years. Full rights to appeal against an order or to have it varied are being provided and the penalties for breach of an order will be a maximum of six months imprisonment. In the UK, the maximum penalty is five years' imprisonment.

The Minister of State with responsibility for children, Deputy Brian Lenihan, has brought forward separate proposals to amend the Criminal Justice Bill 2004 to deal with anti-social behaviour by children, that is, persons aged 12 but under 18. Those proposals are framed in the context of the overall philosophy and policy that underpins the Children Act 2001 and therefore contain additional features to the proposals in relation to adults. Every effort is made to provide an opportunity for the child and his or her parents or guardians to address the behavioural problems in a way that minimises contact with the criminal justice system. For instance, where a child has been issued with a behaviour warning by a garda, the local superintendent, on the basis of a report from a garda in the district, may convene a meeting to discuss the child's behaviour. The meeting will be attended by the child, his or her parents or guardian, the garda who issued the warning and, as appropriate, the juvenile liaison officer and any other person whom the superintendent thinks may assist the child. The meeting may result in a good behaviour contract. The question of admitting the child to the diversion programme or making an application to the courts for a behaviour order only arises where the superintendent, having considered the report from the garda in the district, does not consider that convening a meeting would help to prevent anti-social behaviour by the child concerned or the meeting was convened but a good behaviour contract was not prepared because the child or the parents or guardians refused to give the necessary undertakings or the child breached an undertaking given by him or her. Parents or guardians are to be involved at all important stages of the procedures.

It will be clear from the foregoing that the whole thrust of my proposals with regard to both adults and children is that an application to the courts for an order will arise only as a last resort. It will also be clear that the proposals concerning children already deal with many of the concerns raised by the chief executive of Barnardos regarding the operation of anti-social behaviour orders for children in the UK.