asked the Minister for Justice whether his attention has been directed to a letter recently published under the title of "Prison Reform"; and if so, whether he will state how far the allegations made therein as to the present treatment of prisoners are correct.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Treatment of Prisoners.
I presume that the reference is to a letter which appeared in the Irish Times on 29th April. I have read this letter. Its accuracy may be judged from the following examples:—
1. The writer suggests that prisoners get their last meal for the day at 4.30 p.m. and are locked up in their cells for the night at, or before, that hour.
In fact, prisoners do not go to their cells for the night until 7.30 p.m. and they have a light meal at that hour.
2. It is stated that on Sundays and holidays prisoners are "shut up alone from 12.30 onwards."
In fact, on these days, prisoners are out of cells, and in association, practically all day.
3. It is stated that during the first two years of his imprisonment a penal servitude prisoner is allowed only three letters and one visit per year.
In fact, he is allowed 12 letters and 12 visits per year, and more, if reasonable cause is shown.
4. The statement is made "Prisoners are not allowed forks at their meals." In fact, they are supplied with forks when required by the nature of the meal.
In some of these instances, the facts have already been given some publicity and should be well known to anybody interested in prison conditions. In all instances, the facts could have been ascertained by the slightest inquiry.
The fact that the writer of that letter is a decent well-intentioned old gentleman cannot be challenged.
Mr. Boland
That is so.
Therefore, inasmuch as mischievous persons are deliberately going around amongst the well-intentioned citizenry for the purpose of misleading them about these matters, does the Minister not think it would be a useful thing to set up a commission to examine all these facts, to challenge the mischief-makers to come before the commission where they can be examined and exposed and then let a report be made to this House available to everybody, so that if action is necessary, people can say: "Go and read the report and do not listen to the mischief-makers"?
Mr. Boland
I am well aware that the writer of the letter is a well-intentioned, cultured gentleman, but I am surprised that such a cultured gentleman should not have made the slightest inquiry before he wrote such a letter to a Dublin paper. What difference is a commission going to make? This has happened time and again. You will get well-intentioned people who, in good faith, make a statement of that kind, when a simple inquiry would have shown them that their informants were not speaking correctly.
May I ask the Minister where he expects persons who are not familiar with the facilities available in Government Departments to seek that information? Would it not be a good thing to have all that information in a report, so that one could say to such persons: "If you want the truth, go and read the report"?
If they read the Minister's reply, it should be enough for them.
Mr. Boland
Except that the Minister's reply would be put amongst the advertisements in that particular paper, as it always is. That is what would happen.