THE continuing public debate on Fianna Fail's "zero tolerance" policy amply demonstrates the public interest in the crime issue and in the capacity of politicians to solve it. It is, however, an unbalanced debate.
Fianna Fail published its paper, Leading the Fight Against Crime in early March of this year. We set out our policy of zero tolerance and welcomed the ensuing public debate. Unfortunately, despite the intervening months, critics of the Fianna Fail policy have refused to put their cards on the table. They have refused to answer two fundamental questions.
Firstly, if zero tolerance is unacceptable, what level of crime do they regard as acceptable?
Secondly, which laws, now in force, would they repeal?
Until those questions are answered the debate will remain unbalanced. It will remain a contest between the Fianna Fail policy and an unspecified alternative based on a philosophy of tolerance of a certain level of crime.
When, and if, the critics of zero tolerance get their act together to the extent that they can articulate an alternative policy, a real debate, with two clearly defined sides, can take place. Is it not time that the critics of zero tolerance spelled out their alternative? What, for instance, is the Government's policy on crime?
It is against zero tolerance, but what does it support? Nora Owen told Olivia O'Leary on RTE radio last week that she was in favour of "no tolerance" but against zero tolerance. Is this really the extent of the debate on criminal justice policy for the next five years?
Does the continuation of this onesided debate serve the interests of the Irish people? If there is a realistic and workable alternative to the policy of zero tolerance, let the Minister for Justice spell it out. Let her and her fellow critics express their philosophy and subject it to public scrutiny - as Fianna Fail has with its policy.
To date, the zero tolerance debate on has been bedevilled by talk of buskers, beggars, double yellow line parked drivers and errant cyclists. Exactly the same tactics were used by opponents of last year's bail referendum. The Mars Bar Brigade sought to trivialise the issue and turn the debate towards the theft of chocolate bars. They got their answer. The issue of crime is far too serious to trivialise.
Yet the opponents of zero tolerance have still to depart from the trivial. They seek to suggest the discretion built into our judicial system would disappear if zero tolerance was introduced. This is unfounded. Zero tolerance does not affect judicial discretion in sentencing. It requires the enforcement of laws enacted by the Oireachtas. I have asked before and I ask again - what is wrong with requiring that the law be enforced?
If there are laws which people do not want enforced, then those laws should be repealed. Politicians who favour the non implementation of certain laws have a duty to spell out what they want repealed and why. What acts, now regarded as criminal, do they wish to legalise?
Why is it that, when serious crime presents a major problem, the critics focus on the trivial? Why do the critics of the Fianna Fail policy seek to confine the debate to talk of zero tolerance towards buskers, pavement artists and illegally parked motorists?
I believe the critics of zero tolerance do not wish to engage in a real debate. What they have failed to achieve by the publication of an alternative policy or by rational argument, they will now seek to bring about by innuendo and rumour designed to create a scare when there is nothing to be scared about.
The seeds of such innuendo and rumour could be seen in John Maher's article in last Saturday's Irish Times. It had been suggested to him in the course of his research that up to 2,000 gardai would resign or have to be fired because they would refuse to implement a policy of zero tolerance.
Is it really a coincidence that such a suggestion should surface 10 weeks alter the publication of the Fianna Fail policy paper and with a general election imminent? Or are we about to witness the last desperate throw of the dice by the zero tolerance critics as they scramble to form themselves into the "Don't vote for Fianna Fail or the gardai will mutiny" brigade?
Fianna Fail has set out its policy. We did so in detail and in advance of the election. Why have our critics failed to follow?