It is my firm belief now that we are lax on crime and lax on the causes of crime. A year ago this month before the recess, I raised the issue of my constituents being attacked willy-nilly by under-18s with no apparent consequences. I am talking about lads going around on scooters, intimidating people, bottles being thrown, stones being thrown, young lads and girls being beaten up. I raised it again in my Private Members' business in September. Although we had a good debate and the Government did not oppose the motion, we have not seen any meaningful actions or consequences. It is happening again. I have had reports again of teenagers and young children getting beaten up and left bloodied by random attacks from teenagers. Obviously, we have to take a two-pronged approach. We do not want to criminalise young adults and bring them into that system. Where the juvenile liaison has been funded, it has been shown to work. However, there are no short, sharp, shock consequences to deter people from doing it. As I mentioned last year, people could have 13 or 14 offences before they are eventually caught up with. The interaction of the parents is not being looked at. Even with quad bikes and scooters, confiscation is the number one option at the moment and then the threat perhaps of a juvenile liaison officer, JLO, caution and maybe Tusla being involved with the family. That does not scare any parents who might have bought these items for their kids. We need to remember that it is parents buying the scooters and quad bikes, not the kids going out and getting them. I am talking about the wider issue of kids who do not have adequate parental oversight and who are going out and attacking people. There is no law of reasonable defence in this country. A person who is retreating might be able to stop someone, but what if someone is throwing stones at them? A couple of constituents have reported to me of where three or four people have thrown stones at them, including at a mother with a buggy and a man with her. What is that man supposed to do in that case? If it is two women, how are they supposed to defend themselves in a situation like that? They cannot stop the people throwing stones because it has to be a criminal offence worthy of five years' imprisonment before you can get away with that defence argument. We need more tools to help people defend themselves when they are being attacked. Equally, going back to what I said last year, we need meaningful consequences. If you do X, Y and Z, it is dealt with locally and there are consequences for the children in terms of curfews and withdrawal of certain privileges and for the parents in terms of fines. That is what we need because, right now, the system is not working; it remains as broken as it was last year.

Sentiment score: -0.16

I have given credit where it is due before with Government initiatives, and the body-worn cameras is one positive response. However, even with the addition of gardaí, the numbers per head of population are still at 2008 levels. People want an Operation Irene all year round, where they have that visible Garda deterrence but they are not actually seeing it. The juvenile resources work; there are many projects around the country doing fantastic work. However, it is about trying to stop kids getting to that stage in the first place. As I said, 13 or 14 offences before they are brought into the system is too many. I take the Taoiseach's point on the societal approach; there has to be something that will deter and get the parents involved. If they are working, that might be deducting tax, or if they are on social welfare, it is deducting social welfare. Anything that will hit people will make them think twice about the way their kids are behaving. There is obviously deprivation-related issues and parents need support, so we have to take a holistic approach to this. However, as the Taoiseach said, as a society, we are not dealing with it.

Sentiment score: 0.10