Vol. 111 No. 11
I move:—
That a sum not exceeding £44,280 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending 31st day of March, 1949, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Minister for Justice.
If there is no objection, I propose to follow the practice of previous years and deal now with all of the Votes, numbers 32 to 40 inclusive, for which I am responsible as Minister.
Agreed.
The aggregate amount of the nine Votes is £3,436,360, which shows a decrease of £21,000 on the Estimates (including supplementaries) for the year 1947/48. The figure £3,436,360 is made up as follows:— Vote 32—Office of the Minister for Justice, £66,380; Vote 33—Garda Síochána, £2,891,190; Vote 34—Prisons, £167,970; Vote 35—District Court, £65,950; Vote 36 — Circuit Court, £84,710; Vote 37—Supreme Court and High Court, £70,800; Vote 38—Land Registry and Registry of Deeds, £64,280; Vote 39—Public Record Office, £7,040; Vote 40—Charitable Donations and Bequests, £4,040.
Vote 32—Office of the Minister for Justice—The Estimate for the Office of the Minister for Justice, at £66,380, shows an increase of £1,150 on the Estimate for 1947/48. There is a decrease in the estimate for headquarters staff, and the increase is accounted for mainly by increases in the cost of censorship of films and publications, and travelling.
The Censorship of Publications Act, 1946, established an appeal board and transferred to the censorship board the functions formerly exercised by the Minister for Justice under the Censorship of Publications Act, 1929. These changes made it necessary to increase the staff of the Censorship of Publications Office, and the secretary's salary was also included.
The sum of £350 under sub-head A(5) for the remuneration of a joint secretary of the Irish Legal Terms Advisory Committee should now read as £400. He is a barrister with special qualifications in Irish, employed on a part-time basis. Three legal terms Orders have already been published under the auspices of this committee. They set out Irish equivalents for legal terms relating to (1) landlord and tenant law, conveyancing, and the law of property; (2) criminal law, and (3) workmen's compensation.
Deputies will observe that a sum of £300 is provided under sub-head E for expenses in connection with awards for acts of bravery. Comhairle na Mire Gaile, which makes the awards, was set up last year. The comhairle's report for the year 1947 has been laid on the Table of the Oireachtas.
Under sub-head A (4) there is a sum of £600 for "Legal and Technical Assistance." This is mainly to cover the fees of outside legal draftsmen engaged to assist the several rules committees who make rules of court. One important set of these rules was completed during the year and is now in operation, viz., the new rules of the District Court.
The Estimate for the Garda Síochána at £2,891,190, shows a decrease of £37,530 from last year's figure. The bulk of the decrease is under sub-head A, which provides for salaries, wages and pay. The explanation of the decrease under this sub-head is that retiring members, on or near the maximum of their scales, are being replaced by recruits coming in at the minimum.
The Estimate is prepared on the basis of an estimated strength of 7,494 officers and men, the same figure as last year. The actual strength on 31st May was 7,496. Further recruitment has been suspended pending an examination of the whole question of Garda strength. Losses by deaths and retirements are at present at the rate of 18 per month. The average strength over the year will, therefore, assuming that recruitment remains suspended, be about 100 below the Estimate.
In connection with sub-head H, Transport and Carriage, I have arranged that the Taoiseach will make use of a State car in the same way as other Ministers. In view of this arrangement the Taoiseach will not, of course, avail himself of the motor car allowance provided in sub-head E of the Estimate for his own Department.
While I am on the subject of the Garda Síochána, I want to say a word on the use of influence. It appears that every time there is a change of Minister there are always a few members of the force who think they see an opportunity of securing personal concessions by the use of influence.
Accordingly, I want to point out that any such approach by a member of the force is a breach of discipline, expressly forbidden by the Discipline Regulations made in 1926 by the then Minister for Justice with the approval of the Government. In addition to these Regulations, the use of influence is prohibited by the Garda Síochána Code in specific and clear-cut articles published in 1928, 1932 and 1933 and finally in December of last year when the articles came up in the ordinary way for revision and re-issue. There have also been periodic reminders emphasising the relevant provisions of the Regulations and of the Code; thus there were reminders in 1932, 1933, 1934, 1935 and 1937.
Deputies and other public men who are approached by members of the force to use their influence on their behalf should bear in mind that the member is asking them to do something which is contrary to the regulations and, if done, may result in injuring the applicant instead of helping him. What I have said applies to attempts to use influence to obtain promotion or to escape punishment as well as to secure a transfer, but transfers are, in practice, the source of most of the trouble.
Before I leave the subject, I should like to make it clear that every member of the force who has (or thinks he has) a legitimate grievance can be certain of having his case fully and fairly considered by making appropriate representations through the proper channels. Moreover, a member is allowed, if he so desires, to address representations directly to the Commissioner in a sealed envelope and can thus be sure that anything he may have to say will be brought to the Commissioner's personal notice.
The Estimate for Prisons at £167,970, shows an increase of £13,120 over last year's Estimate.
As Deputies will observe the principal increases are: sub-head B, victualling, £830; sub-head E, fuel, light, water, cleaning articles, etc., £3,606; sub-head H, maintenance of buildings and equipment, £6,340; sub-head K, incidental expenses, £929; sub-head M, maintenance of criminal lunatics in district mental hospitals, £700; sub-head O, contributions to discharged prisoners' aid societies, £925; sub-head P, manufacturing departments and farms, £2,320.
The increase on sub-head B is due to the increase in the cost of foodstuffs for prisoners. The estimate of the cost per head per annum has been increased from £23 7s. 2d. for 1947/48 to £26 15s. 7d. for 1948/49.
The increase in sub-head H is mainly due to provision being made for a new boilerhouse at Mountjoy Prison, repairs to the roofs of Mountjoy and Portlaoighise prisons and further improvements in St. Patrick's at Clonmel. As I have mentioned St. Patrick's, I may perhaps take this opportunity to draw attention to the very interesting illustrated booklet on the institution recently compiled by the visiting committee and published by the Stationery Office with my approval.
The increase under sub-head K is due mainly to provision being made for the purchase of miniature film units for Mountjoy, Portlaoighise and St. Patrick's, Clonmel. for the supply of cigarettes (or tobacco) to prisoners in Portlaoighise, and for the purchase of games for the use of prisoners during recreation periods.
Sub-head M, Maintenance of Criminal Lunatics in District Mental Hospitals, is based on estimates obtained from district mental hospitals throughout the country. The cause of the increase is an increase in the costs of maintenance.
The increase under sub-head O is due to the grant to the Catholic Discharged Prisoners' Aid Society being increased from £50 to £1,000. Discharged prisoners' aid societies look after discharged prisoners, buy clothes and tools, and endeavour to obtain employment for them. The Catholic Discharged Prisoners' Aid Society is a subsidiary of the St. Vincent de Paul Society, and the latter society asked for an increase in the grant. The increase was, in fact, granted before I became Minister but I quite approve of it and I am sure that the money will be spent to good advantage.
The increase under sub-head P in respect of the expenses of the manufacturing department and farms is accounted for by the fact that provision is made for the purchase of finishing machines for the shoemaking shops at Mountjoy, Portlaoighise and St. Patrick's, Clonmel; for the replacement of worn out mail-bag making machines; and the purchase of an electric washing machine and an electric hydro-extractor for Mountjoy. There is nothing that I need add at this stage with regard to the changes of the several sub-heads on this Vote. There are, however, two topics of more general interest on which I should like to add a word. Firstly, I should like to draw the attention of the House to the fact that we are making provision for the first time this year for a post of Inspector of Prisons. The actual provision will be found in Vote 32. The appointment of a whole-time Inspector of Prisons is long overdue and it was recognised by my predecessor, who took the initiative in having the appointment made shortly before he went out of office. Secondly, I should like to refer to the change in the name of the Borstal Institute at Clonmel. This Institute will be known in future as "St. Patrick's, Clonmel."
In connection with the last-mentioned Votes (Garda Síochána and Prisons), it is usual and proper to make a short statement on the position as regards crime—the fundamental reason why the taxpayer has to provide £3,000,000 a year for these two services. I shall not go into details. Deputies will find a mass of information in the annual reports of the Commissioner of the Garda Síochána, which are issued to the Press and copies of which are to be had in the Oireachtas Library. The final report for the year 1947 will not be available for another month or so, but I have received from the Commissioner an interim report. The outstanding items in it are as follows:—
Indictable Crime: The total number of indictable crimes reported to the police in 1947 was 15,302 as compared with 15,078 in 1946 and 16,786 in 1945. The figure of 15,302 was made up as follows:—Offences against the person (murder, manslaughter, wounding, etc.), 450; offences against property with violence (burglary, house-breaking, robbery and malicious damage), 2,736; offences against property without violence (larceny, receiving, embezzlement, etc.), 11,931; other indictable offences (forgery, perjury, unlawful possession of firearms, etc.), 185.
Non-indictable Offences: The total number of prosecutions for nonindictable offences in 1947 was 153,081, as compared with 150,928 in 1946 and 150,862 in 1945. Of these prosecutions 89,110 were under the Road Traffic Act, 59,209 being in respect of offences against the lighting regulations. There were 11,634 prosecutions under the licensing Acts, 13,655 in respect of unlicensed dogs, and 9,328 for offences under the school attendances Acts.
Juvenile Crime: The number of persons under 18 years of age who were charged with indictable offences in 1947 was 2,604, as compared with 2,409 in 1946 and 2,833 in 1945. Of these juveniles, 739 were charged with housebreaking, 306 with larceny from shops, 163 with larceny from unattended motor cars, and 1,049 with other larcenies.
Vote 35 for the District Court, at £65,950, shows an increase of £3,200 on last year's figure, and Vote 36 for the Circuit Court, at £84,710, shows an increase of £770. Deputies will observe that there is, at the end of each of these Votes, an appendix giving particulars as to the grading and pay of the clerks. Except in the case of the clerks in the Dublin Metropolitan District of the District Court, the grades and figures shown in these appendices are those arrived at recently, after discussions between my Department and the Department of Finance as to the reorganisation of the Circuit Court and District Court staffs. These reorganisations have not been completed. The position is, broadly, that the Department of Finance has indicated how far it is prepared to go and the clerks are pressing for better terms on various points. I hope that the whole business will be settled in course of the next few months and I shall do my best to see that a fair balance is struck between the claims of the clerks and the purse of the taxpayer, who has to meet the bill.
As regards the Circuit Court end of the problem, I may perhaps refer to the figure, etc., shown on page 190 under sub-head A (9)—Salaries of Staff in the Offices of County Registrars. In this table, the total number of staff for the new year is shown as 141, as compared with 119 for the preceding year, an apparent increase of 22 persons, whereas the figures for remuneration for the new year add up to a little less than in the preceding year. It might, therefore, be thought that the numbers are being increased, but that the salaries are being cut. The truth is, however, that of the 80 odd temporary clerks some 20 have in the past been shown in a group as "temporary staff" and not counted by heads, whereas they are now classified and numbered as so many clerks of such-and-such a grade. Also, the fact that the total remuneration appears to be lower for the new year than for the old year is an illusion, arising from the fact that last year's estimate was about £3,000 in excess of actual requirements. What all this comes to, taking it broad and large, is that the staff remains much the same in numbers and personnel, but is arranged under different classifications, and the total remuneration is estimated at about £2,500 more than was actually paid last year. Lastly, the figures shown for the new year are in many cases only an approximation because, as I have already said, the new scheme of staffing has not yet been translated into reality and until that is done and the position and pay of each individual is definitely settled it is not possible to give an absolutely correct figure.
The position as regards the District Court clerks is much the same, but with this difference, that the scheme in the latter case has been put into effect to the extent that each clerk was actually advanced some months ago to the salary point appropiate to him under the scheme.
It will be observed that in Vote 35, sub-head A, a sum of £1,000 has been provided for a District Court Valuer in the Dublin Metropolitan Area. The valuer assists the justice who has been assigned to the hearing of applications from tenants of small premises under Part III of the Rent Restrictions Act, 1946.
As I have already mentioned in connection with the Vote for the Minister's Office, new District Court Rules were made during the year and are now in force.
The Estimates for the Supreme and High Court, the Land Registry and Registry of Deeds, the Public Record Office and Charitable Donations and Bequests show only very small fluctuations from last year's figures. I do not think it is necessary for me to say anything on these Votes, except in regard to the Land Registry. I believe that in this case the provision made is inadequate. As Deputies know, there have been complaints about delays in the Land Registry. Even during the short time which has elapsed since I became Minister, it has become clear to me that the volume of work coming into the Land Registry has greatly increased, and that it will continue to increase. For example, on the "first registration" side, the number of new folios which have to be opened annually is now double what it was a few years ago, and will go even higher, probably up to three times the old rate. This is the result of the acceleration of vesting work in the Land Commission. Arrears of "first registration" work have already accumulated to an undue extent. A considerable increase in staff is inevitable in these circumstances, and the question of additional accommodation also arises. I have given a direction that the matter is to be dealt with as one of urgency. So far as the general taxpayer is concerned, there is the consolation that, owing to the larger revenue in fees, the office is and will remain entirely self-supporting so far as the cost of actual staff is concerned, with a considerable surplus towards incidental expenses such as pensions, buildings and stationery.
I feel I should say a word upon the question of law reform. It is one that cannot fail to be of concern to a Minister for Justice and it is at present engaging my attention. In this connection we shall give due consideration to the proposal of the previous Government for the establishment of a permanent or quasi-permanent law reform committee. Meanwhile it may be possible to proceed with some reforms in non-contentious matters, reforms that are long overdue.
On the question of charitable donations and bequests I am satisfied that there is an urgent need for consolidation of the statute law in relation to charities. This law is spread over three confused and confusing statutes. We hope to have this work undertaken and completed during my term of office.
It is gratifying to notice that the intentions expressed by the former Minister for Justice last year have been carried through. The Minister mentioned a sum of £13,000 which has been spent on improving conditions in our prisons. The former Minister, on the occasion when he advocated prison reform, said that he did not want to turn the prison into a Gresham Hotel but at the same time he wanted to give the prisoners better conditions, always maintaining the necessary prison discipline. It is clear now from this Estimate that the food provided in the prison is better; it is clear that the prisoners have more recreation and more games and that the system is working very well.
I am sorry that the Minister has decided to stop recruiting to the Guards. The Guards have always provided a source of excellent employment for the best elements in the country. There is an increasing need, especially in the City of Dublin, for more Guards. Judging by the extraordinary traffic accumulation, the Guards in the City of Dublin must be heavily overburdened. I hope that this temporary suspension of recruiting will be very temporary indeed.
There is another matter that arises on this Estimate to which I should like to refer. Our Government has been accused by the present Taoiseach of having made legal appointments solely and purely on political grounds. All legal appointments made by our Government were made strictly on merit. If the Minister will examine the list of such appointments he will find that in every rank of the judicial appointments made there are a good round dozen about whose politics we could not be certain. I am certain that the present Government could judge what their politics were but, so far as we know, they were not to our way of thinking. Naturally one does not appoint very active politicians who are opponents. It would be an insult to offer an active lawyer who was also an active politician in the Opposition a job because that would be tantamount to a bribe. In making such accusations against us the inference is that lawyers are simply on the hazard to take jobs from any Party irrespective of whether they are supporters of that Party or not. Perhaps in some measure many such appointments, according to all the traditions of Government, are confined to one side rather than to the other. At the same time where merit is involved and where it is clear that people deserve certain appointments, such appointments are made and have been made in the past. I take it that such appointments will always be made on this basis. On that basis it is necessary for me to say that at no time in the past have we made our appointments purely upon political grounds.
Another matter which requires the careful attention of the Minister is the increase in embezzlement and pilfering which arises chiefly from gambling, and more especially from gambling on dogs.
And mostly in the Post Office.
Some tragic cases have occurred in the Post Office. But I think the Minister's own detective force will tell him that the present extraordinarily high percentage in these crimes is due to the craze for gambling on the dogs. I do not say that one should take restrictive measures against dog racing. In its own way it is a good sport, but it is also true that it has led to considerable abuses. The way in which these abuses can be dealt with is a matter for consideration by the Department of Justice. How can one control the appetite which it develops? Men have told me that when they become obsessed with the passion for gambling they eat, drink, sleep and dream dogs. It so obsesses them that they can think of nothing else. The State must take cognisance of abuses of that kind and the State should be able to find some remedy to restrain such abuses. They are spoiling a good sport. One hears a good deal about the racketeering that goes on at dog racing tracks. That in its turn is likely to spoil the export trade of dogs from this country. It is the breeders and the owners who suffer most from these abuses. Strict rules are in force in reference to horse racing and the turf generally. It should not be beyond the ingenuity of the Department of Justice to find some way, either by administrative regulation or legislation, to remedy these evils. It is a very important matter and I hope that the Minister will give it his careful attention.
I want to take this opportunity of congratulating the Minister for Justice on the introduction of his Estimate. As an old comrade of his I am very pleased to see him in the position of Minister for Justice in this Government. I sincerely hope that we will be able to discuss this Estimate without any advertence to petty or Party politics. At the beginning, I might say that the Minister has shocked me a little by his reference to the change of system with regard to the provision of a motor car for the Taoiseach. When the Vote on Account was being considered, I mentioned that I hoped the system that applied to the late Taoiseach, of paying him an allowance in respect of a motor car, should be extended to the other Ministers. I find now that instead of that it has been decided to discontinue the allowance to the Taoiseach and to make available to him a car in the same way as to the other Ministers. I think that is a grave mistake and I am very sorry that it has happened. One of the things we should try to do is to reduce expenses and it would be an acceptable earnest of our intention to reduce expenses if the practice of providing each Minister with an allowance instead of a motor car was carried out. That is the only matter on which I have to criticise the Minister's Estimate.
I should like, before dealing with the Garda in a general way, to say that after many years' experience of the Garda—experience of them in the ordinary way as a citizen, experience of them as an Army officer who came in contact with them very frequently, and as a solicitor practising in the Dublin courts for a number of years—the standard of efficiency and the standard of conduct of our Garda is very high indeed, and that we as a Parliament ought to be proud that we have such a high standard of efficiency and conduct in our Garda force. We know that Gardaí are not overpaid; in fact, in my view, they are underpaid. I believe their opportunities for promotion are unduly limited. Notwithstanding the fact that many of them have very heavy responsibilities, it is a splendid thing to be able to pay tribute to their high standard of integrity and conduct.
I have felt, over a number of years, that the grievances of the Gardaí—and those grievances are many; personal grievances, in a way—are not being handled in the way in which they ought to be. I think the disciplinary code of the Gardaí is too rigid and almost inhuman. I feel that the disciplinary code does not guarantee to the individual member of the Gardaí ordinary justice, and I will take this opportunity of appealing to the Minister to set up a new code which will guarantee justice to individual Gardaí. I cannot follow, from any legal principle, on what the Garda disciplinary code is based. I think the regulations were made by the Minister for Justice in 1926 or 1927 under the Police Forces Amalgamation Act and those regulations which, under that Act, are supposed to be issued with the approval of the Government—and I must take it they were issued at that time with the approval of the Government—are unique in that they set up a number of extraordinary offences.
The main provision for the hearing of charges, in the ultimate analysis, is by means of a form of sworn inquiry. One would imagine that where a charge is preferred against an individual—in this case a Garda—and where that Garda denies the charge, there would be some hearing at which he would be entitled to be present, to which he would be entitled to bring his witnesses and at which he could cross-examine the witnesses against him. So far as I can gather from the peculiar provisions of the disciplinary code, charges may be made against a Garda and he may deny them in writing, and that file containing the charges and denials in writing is referred to the Commissioner. In a week, a fortnight or a month the Garda may find that the Commissioner has found him guilty of some offence. I say that is contrary to all principles of justice and I know that it is only necessary to bring that matter before the Minister to have it examined so that it will be put right.
I had before me recently a case of a Garda who was discharged for disobedience of orders, neglect of duty and insubordinate or oppressive conduct. The matter was rather trivial, I must say, but the charges sounded very serious—disobedience of orders, neglect of duty and insubordinate and oppressive conduct. The matters that gave rise to those charges were dealt with summarily. The Garda was transferred from the position he occupied. A penalty of approximately 10/- a week, loss of pay, was imposed on him while the charges were under investigation. The Garda denied the charges in writing and the decision of the Commissioner was: "No decision is entered in regard to charges 1 and 2; he is found guilty on charge No. 3, and he is cautioned." That was the decision of the Commissioner. In the meantime, while this was going on, the Garda was transferred from his station and penalised to the extent of 10/- a week. I say to the House that as far as the Minister is concerned, he would be anxious that that form of discipline would be changed.
I have often heard that a Garda is expected to bring a certain number of charges against members of the general public in a period of a month, a year, or some period of that kind. I have often heard that and I have often denied it, and I am quite sure there is no member of the House, including the Minister, who could believe that a Garda would be guilty of any offence by not bringing charges against members of the general public over a period. I am glad to see the Minister shaking his head and saying he would not believe it. I am just going to read a charge—and I want the House to listen very carefully to it—preferred recently against a member of the force. "Neglect of duty"—that is a standing sort of charge in the Garda—"that is to say that you evinced continued apathy, neglect, indifference or inefficiency in attending or discharging the duties of your rank, in that during the period from the 1st January, 1947, to the 31st December, 1947, whilst engaged mainly as a sergeant on outdoor duty in the district"—I shall not mention the district—"you failed to take proceedings against any person either by arrest or summons for breach of the law." Could anyone in this House believe that is possible? I ask would any Deputy believe that it is possible for a member of the force to be charged in that way?
Is the Deputy sure that there was not some specific item behind it?
No item behind it.
Did they convict him?
I want the Minister to listen to this. There was a second charge against him in which the wording was exactly the same except that the period was longer—from the 1st January, 1946, to the 30th April, 1948. What is that except charging a Garda because he did not bring a charge against anybody in a period of a year in one case and in a period of two years in the other? I am only availing of this opportunity to bring that before the House and before the Minister in support of my contention and of the case I am making here that the disciplinary code, in so far as it applies to the Gardaí, is antiquated, out of date, and needs absolute revision.
I have had the misfortune on a few occasions to represent Gardaí at these things that are known as sworn inquiries. They are a sort of bad cross between a military court of inquiry and a military court martial. What happens there? The Garda is charged with an offence and the charge comes down to him. He writes "not guilty" or denies the charge and it goes up to the Commissioner who directs a sworn inquiry. The Commissioner appoints two Garda officers to hold that inquiry and a Garda officer to prosecute. The Garda who is being charged, if he makes application for permission to the Commissioner to employ legal aid, may have a solicitor or counsel to defend him but he has not that as of right. He must apply for permission. He receives the documents which contain a summary of the evidence against him but, under this very peculiar code, he is not supplied with a copy of the charge against him. That I submit is wrong. He is not supplied with a copy of the charge although he is supplied with a short summary of the evidence. The Garda code does not allow him to receive a copy of the charge and it is only when his defending solicitor reaches the court and hears the charges read out that he is in a position to know what the charges are. The Garda may recollect from the time he received the written charges originally that those are the charges against him but the actual charges are not in his possession at any time except at an early preliminary stage and until they are read out at the court.
The code provides that evidence must be taken down in longhand and that there must not be any interlineations or alterations of the evidence as recorded. They have adopted a system now of providing a typist to take the evidence and this sworn inquiry carries on in leisurely fashion over days and perhaps over weeks. When I said I had the misfortune to appear at a few of them, I was saying what was perfectly correct because the procedure is, if I am cross-examining a witness, that I ask a question and the typist proceeds to type the question. When the typist has typed the question, the witness answers and that is typed also and the result is that an ordinary investigation which should take only a day lasts for five or six days. There is no hope in the world of ever catching out a witness by quick or clever cross-examination because he has all the time in the world from the time the question is put until it is typed to think of an answer. However, I am not concerned with that aspect of the matter. The aspect with which I am concerned is that the unfortunate Garda has to pay for his defence and he has to pay six times the amount he would have to pay if the inquiry were held under any modern system that is known. I ask the Minister to avail of the earliest opportunity to change the whole system of investigation, of charges against Gardaí.
I suggest to the Minister that he could very easily adopt here in Dublin City, in the metropolitan area, the system of the orderly room, where, on one day in the week, the assistant commissioner who is responsible for the area would have before him all Gardaí who are charged with breaches of discipline. He would be able to see them and would be able to make up his mind as to whether they were telling lies or telling the truth. The system would be speedy and it would be just, in the long run. At the moment, the Commissioner has to decide whether he approves or not of findings on written evidence, which can show him nothing as to the demeanour of a witness before the court, as to whether it is patently obvious that he is telling lies or not. He must decide on a written record. Only within the last few days, I was at one of these sworn inquiries. The matter has not got to the point of reaching the Commissioner and being decided, and consequently I do not propose to refer to it on this Estimate—I may have to refer to it on the Estimate next year—but I ask the Minister to make sure that he will have an opportunity of examining the record of that sworn inquiry. I think I have dealt sufficiently with that aspect of the matter. I think it is important and I think it is necessary that the matter should be investigated.
During the debate on the Army Estimate, I made a recommendation to the Minister for Defence, in which I was supported by Deputy Vivion de Valera, with regard to courts martial, and I heard to-day that the recommendations we made to the Minister have been accepted, which, I think, is a good thing. I sincerely hope that what I am now recommending to the Minister with regard to discipline in the Garda will receive the same sympathetic consideration as our recommendations to the Minister for Defence in regard to courts martial of soldiers.
I have said that the Garda are men of efficiency, of integrity, and, in the great majority of cases, of honour. To a large extent, the administration of the State depends on the Garda. If the Garda are a good, reliable force, it will have a good reaction, but if the Garda are not a good force, it will react against the public good, and I say to the Minister that the Garda are entitled to reasonable conditions. Some of the barracks throughout the country in which they are compelled to live are a disgrace. The quarters in which the Garda are compelled to live in Dublin Castle are an absolute disgrace. I ask the Minister to carry out a personal investigation of the sleeping quarters of the Garda in Dublin Castle. I think he will be shocked by the conditions he will find there. We want a good police force and we are proud of a good police force. Let us make the conditions under which the Garda live and work as up-to-date and as decent as we can make them.
That brings me to the matter of promotions. One sees here in Dublin Gardaí of the greatest efficiency kept on the one class of work for 25 or 30 years. They are never promoted because they are efficient in that particular job. We have quite a number of men on point duty, some of whom are the finest point duty men in Europe. We also have detective officers whose capability and efficiency are well known to those of us who have experience of the District Courts in Dublin. These men are in their jobs for 20, 25, and more, years without promotion. I say that is unfair. There should be an opening for the capable and efficient man after a certain number of years' service and the Garda establishments should be amended from time to time to provide for these promotions.
One other matter which I should like to mention is the matter of activities of the special branch of the Garda. I want to mention this only in a very incidental way. The special branch of the Garda was formed for, and used mainly in, the investigation of political matters, and, over a period of years, there was a serious conflict between the citizens and that branch of the Garda. I had hoped that, with the change of Government and the installing of a Minister who had shown a completely new outlook by his decision to release all the political prisoners from Portlaoighise prison, there would be a change, but when the Easter Week commemoration ceremonies were on, when the Bodenstown ceremonies were on last Sunday, when a train was taking a big body of Dublin citizens to Belfast for the Seán McCaughey commemorations, a notable feature in connection with all these events was the presence of a very large body of the special branch of the Garda. I am quite sure that that attendance has been what you might call a carry on in the system and it was not done on the direct instructions of the Minister, although the Minister must bear the responsibility because he is Minister. I only mention the matter to make a recommendation to the Minister. A great deal has been done to end what I might term the political bitterness in the country; a great deal has been done towards that aim by the setting up of this inter-Party Government, and it would be a great pity if any new conflict were to develop between the special branch of the Garda and our citizens. I would say to the Minister, unless the necessity for it does arise, if it ever arises—I hope it will never arise and I believe it will never arise—he should make a special Order that when these national commemorations are taking place the special branch of the Garda should not be permitted to go near the place. In that way he will help to break down a number of the things which have caused bitterness over a number of years. I am satisfied that the Minister will look at it in the same way as I do, and being the man he is, with a big, broad, human outlook, I am sure that he will accede to the recommendations I make to him in that connection now.
Deputy Little praised the Minister for the improvements he has made in the prison services and for the improved conditions he has got for ordinary prisoners. I am sure I support all improvements of the conditions of prisoners in our prisons and our jails, but one thing I would say to the Minister is that there must be an improvement in the conditions of prison warders. Take the warders here in Mountjoy. The quarters in which they live were built in 1868 and they have never been improved since that. They are decorated every seven years. I understand that there are 60 cottages in which 300 members of the staff and their families, the majority of which are young children, live, and only in one of these houses is there a bathroom. In only one house of 60 is there a bath, and that bath happens to be there because a deputy governor happened to be provided with one of those houses a couple of years ago, but there is no bath in the other 59 houses. A warder can be fined or otherwise punished for not giving a prisoner a bath every week, but he has no place to bath his own children or himself.
Let him take them into the jail.
They would be safer there. These houses would have been condemned years ago by the local authority but for the fact that they are outside the jurisdiction of Dublin Corporation. The prison staff must search the clothes of prisoners often suffering from unspeakable diseases, but they have no opportunity of washing their hands as only one wash-basin is provided in the prison, apparently, and officers cannot leave their posts to go to this wash-basin. Their hours of duty are long and I have here a record of the hours done by one particular warder in a week; it is 68 hours.
They have no regular hours and they do not know whether they are on in the morning, in the afternoon or in the night. They are under the most rigid discipline and must be available whenever they are required. These warders are very anxious that they should have something in the nature of the Garda Representative Body to look after their interests and I would ask the Minister to take up this aspect with the warders, the members of the prison services, so that improved conditions in housing, improved conditions with regard to hours of duty and improved pay may be made available to them. I have plenty of material in regard to that matter of hours of duty and pay, but I would leave it entirely to the Minister on the suggestion I make that he should set up in consultation with the members of the prison services a representative body that would advise him and advise the Department on these matters.
While dealing with hours of duty, I should mention the hours of duty that apply to members of the Gardaí on duty here in Dublin City. At an earlier stage I mentioned the Garda code and the Garda code contains very specifically the hours of duty in Dublin area. Those hours were fixed at the time they were included in the Garda code in consultation with the Gardaí in the different barracks in Dublin and that system of hours which is acceptable to the Gardaí was carried on for a period of 20 years. Recently the Assistant Commissioner, General Murphy, changed those hours. Complaints were made in this House and to the Minister regarding that change. Let me say that I do not know whether those changes in hours were properly made, because under the provisions of the Garda code they could only be made by the Commissioner himself and any alterations in them could only be made as amendments to the code. Whether that correct procedure was carried out or not I am not in a position to say. At a recent inquiry I tried to get the regulations which were made, but all I could get was a stencilled copy of the instructions that had been issued by the Assistant Commissioner, General Murphy. If there was nothing beyond General Murphy's instructions that change in hours is not a regulation at all and any Guard who breaks the rules cannot be found guilty by any tribunal or court, but I was not able to find that out at the sworn inquiry and it may be that the regulations were validly made. Under the old hours a man was entitled to have meals at regular times. As a result of representations which were made to the Minister a change has been made, but it did not go right back to the old and acceptable hours. Now we have this sort of hours for a Guard in Dublin: from 7.30 p.m. to 3.30 a.m., with 45 minutes off for a meal to be cooked and prepared by himself. He gets that at 12 midnight until 12.45. He goes on duty at 7.30 and comes off at 3.30 in the morning, when he goes to bed, and he has to have the whole three meals of the day packed into the few hours from the time he gets out of bed before he goes on duty. One night he starts at 7.30 p.m. and goes off at 3.30 a.m. The next night he goes on at 11 p.m. and comes off at 7 a.m. He goes to bed at 7.45 a.m. and then he takes up duty at 7.30 p.m., and he has his three meals in the space of a couple of hours. The day duty is from 7 a.m. to 3 p.m. and he gets home to dinner at 3.30. The next day he goes on from 3 p.m. to 11 p.m., with a meal whenever he can get it.
The result of that arrangement is that a Garda has to have meal hours of his own and his family have to have meal hours of their own. The whole arrangements of these men are being completely upset. Arrangements which were good enough for 20 years and which could have been carried on without any upset to a Garda or his family in my respectful submission should have been continued and should not have been changed without the consent and approval of the Gardaí. I am informed that every member of the Garda Síochána in the Dublin metropolitan area, both married and single, is opposed to these hours of duty. The Gardaí are not paid very generously and that is a very severe handicap on a Garda. It means extra expenditure as he has to have his meals at a different hour from the hour at which his family have their meals in the ordinary way. I ask the Minister to look into that particular matter with a view to restoring the hours agreed upon between the Commissioner and the Gardaí over 20 years ago.
Gardaí have grievances. All forces that are run under a disciplinary code have grievances. The method by which a complaint is made to a superior officer and is sent right up along the line to the Commissioner is not the best way of dealing with these grievances. I have come across cases and other Deputies have come across cases where for a sort of half disciplinary reason a Garda is transferred maybe 50 miles or 100 miles away. He may be transferred in the last two years of his service. He may have built up a home and his children may have been attending a good school. Then he may be transferred in the last couple of years of service to some place where there is no school or no opportunity for him to have his children educated. There may be no house for him in that place. The result is that he has to leave his wife and family in one place and go to live in the other station many miles away. Many of these transfers have come to my notice over a period of years. They have all been imposed from the point of view of discipline, as a sort of punishment.
I say to the Minister that there ought to be set up some type of independent tribunal invested with full powers to inquire into what I may call personal or semi-personal grievances of the Gardaí. If that were done, I am quite sure that a lot of this discontent that upsets Gardaí would be removed. From the point of view of the efficiency of the force it does not matter very much whether Sergeant A is in Ballydehob or in Ballinamuck. It makes no difference to the efficiency of the force, if the sergeant is competent, whether he is stationed in one place or in the other. I, therefore, strongly recommend that an independent tribunal invested with full powers to inquire into and remedy the grievances and complaints of individual members of the Garda Síochána should be set up.
There are a number of other matters with which I should like to deal, but many of them would involve legislation, and I am not permitted to mention them in this debate. I ask the Minister, however, to take serious note of the recommendations I have made. I will conclude on the same note as I began. I welcome his appointment as Minister for Justice and I sincerely hope that when this present Dáil has run its course the grievances to which I have referred will have been remedied by the present Minister for Justice.
I take it that what really Deputy Cowan has been suggesting is arbitration for the Garda. That is a matter that perhaps the Minister could consider. I would be more concerned, however, for the purposes of this debate, with two things: one is the fact that the strength of our Garda force does not appear to be adequate for our requirements. The second, which is tied up with that, is that the present conditions, particularly in the city, are imposing a pretty severe strain on the force and that the question of their morale is something to which the House might pay attention. That morale would depend very largely (1) on their strength and conditions of service; on the position in which they are placed to do their job; (2) on the extent to which that force is backed by the Government. That force is the executive arm of the Government in preserving law and order. Its efficiency and effectiveness and the ultimate fate and future of law and order will depend on the support the Garda get from the Government.
There are few other Votes on which a question so touching the whole root of social order in the State comes up. For that reason, the part of the Vote apportioned to the Garda is one of great importance. I should like to deal with the two aspects of that which I mentioned. Firstly, our responsibility to the country in seeing that the force provided for the maintenance of order is adequate to that task. Secondly, the question of factors affecting their morale, and particularly the factor of the support which that force will get from the Government of the day.
With regard to the first point, one thing strikes one: The strength of the Garda is inadequate. I think the last Government was coming to realise that after the war. It was apparent during the war that extra police duties had been thrown on to the Garda but, as long as the Army was there, under the emergency conditions, discharging certain security functions, the full effect of this extra load on the Garda was not felt. Now, however, the Garda must carry the whole burden. What burden have they to face in addition to the burden prior to the war? Generally, and at large, a number of administrative details have been passed on to the force imperceptibly. When some Government Order or some new Act has to be enforced, a provision would creep in by which certain forms would be filled at the local Garda station or certain particulars would be collected by the local Garda and forwarded to a central headquarters. Imperceptibly these things multiplied and, as they multiplied, the burden on the officers of the force became greater, with the result that in country districts particularly the Garda had little time for ordinary police duties in many cases by the time they had discharged many of these duties which in former years were not considered proper duties for police officers and which, in any event, did not arise.
Side by side with that you had in the City of Dublin—and I presume in other towns—a certain police problem developing. The main civil police problem developing in Dublin is the traffic problem. In order to keep traffic in Dublin in a fairly workable order, a large number of Garda are required. Take the parking of cars alone. In order to try to enforce the parking laws a considerable number of men are employed in checking on cars. The bottlenecks in the city still require personal traffic control by Gardaí. There are certain spots that do not seem suitable for automatic control, and, in any event, the necessary apparatus is not immediately available. Be that as it may, because of the traffic problem in Dublin and because of the fact that the parking regulations require greater attention from the Guards than they did formerly, the burden on the Guards has increased.
In regard to crime, I am not going to suggest, as was suggested on other occasions in this House, that we are abnormally bad in respect of crime in this country or anything else, but it is undeniable that there are certain types of crime to eradicate which attention and careful organisation is needed. There have been certain series of house-breakings. There have been offences against order, such as brawling—at least I get the impression from the newspapers—slightly more frequently than formerly. Arising out of this house-breaking epidemic, larcenies, and so forth, there seems to be a suggestion that the people concerned in these activities are showing a degree of organisation not previously found. If that is so, it is obvious that it is going to require a greater degree of organisation and planning on the part of the Guards to meet them. That, in turn, will entail a greater demand on personnel. It is also rather disquieting to find, on reading the evening papers of the last week, that there have been prosecutions of people for the possession of firearms and that these prosecutions arose from Garda inquiries into ordinary crime, and that there have been times in the last year when, it seems, firearms were associated with ordinary crime—a thing that was almost unknown in this country—and that we may now expect firearms to be associated with the ordinary criminal, in certain respects at any rate.
These are all circumstances which necessitate co-ordinated police action, and the availability at every and any particular time of a force adequate to meet such a threat. If the Guards are then to bear in addition to that, their civil duties, statutory duties and traffic control and so forth, I am afraid we will be forced to the conclusion that the strength of the Garda in the country as a whole is, to say the least of it, not sufficient. How far any adjustment can be made in that, I do not know. I see, for instance, that you could offset an increase in the strength if you took off the Garda some of the duties that have been unloaded on to them, such as the interminable filling up of forms.
Is not that a better solution?
It may be, Deputy. I am granting you that. I am taking facts as they stand at the moment. If the facts as they stand at the moment are to continue, then I feel, and I think many other Deputies feel, that the strength of the force is inadequate. On the other hand, if certain duties which are not police duties properly so called and even certain quasi-police duties, are withdrawn from the force and charged elsewhere, I admit that that is another way, and I would go so far as to agree with Deputy Collins that it might perhaps be the preferable way of dealing with it. Be that as it may, as the facts stand, the Garda are a taxed force. I can talk with some knowledge of the City of Dublin, and I say it is because of the inadequacy of their strength in Dublin that the change in the hours of duty has imposed the serious burden on them that has been already referred to in this debate.
In maintaining the efficiency of the police force, I would, in a nutshell, recommend to the Minister considering the whole problem from the point of view of the strength that is required to keep the Garda at an efficient level because, with the best men in the world, they cannot achieve that efficiency if there are not enough of them to do it. Secondly, in connection with this problem, I would couple two things, namely, the question of the extra duties imposed on them and the question of hours of duty. These are really all aspects of administration. These details should be so co-ordinated as to give the maximum efficiency.
In Dublin, as has already been suggested to him, the Minister might cause this question of hours of duty to be considered again and also the question of the additional tasks that have been put on the Garda with a view to trying to minimise the burden so that you will get the maximum efficiency for the duties which are charged to that force.
I come to the question of morale. It is hardly necessary to say that practically the whole social order depends on the morale of that force and that morale will depend on, firstly, the conditions under which the force itself operates. They have got to be given the chance of being efficient and of having a high morale. Secondly, it will depend on the support which they get from the Executive. Adequate provision must be made for the force under both of these heads or the morale of the force will suffer, and if it suffers public order suffers and the whole social fabric of the State is threatened. In regard to conditions, there is obviously a case for that section of the community, apart from the general case to be made for others, of trying to give them the best living conditions possible. In other words, a Garda is an important member of the community. He is in a position of public trust and should, therefore, be able to live in a way befitting the nature of the trust reposed in him.
The Guards did get some increases last year. The present Minister for Finance criticised the increases severely in last year's debates and intimated that they were not sufficient at all. I am not going to go into the merits of the figures at this moment beyond pointing out that there is a case for paying a police force adequately and of saying that that should be done, and that, in addition, proper facilities in regard to houses, for children's education and so forth should be afforded to the officers of the force. In that connection, I think that the increases given last year by the last Government amounted to £350,000. It was not as much as many people would like to see given, and the present Minister for Finance in particular criticised the situation very severely and suggested, by implication at any rate, that much more should be done. I would like to suggest some ways which might perhaps help. One is to try to accommodate those officers with special regard to their family situation in posting them. In other words, if a Garda is a happy, contented man himself, he will be an efficient and reliable officer. There are a number of these officers who, because of restrictions in establishment, cannot easily get promotion. Many of them are men who have served from perhaps the inception of the force and are receiving pensions for the services which they rendered to this country in other days. Now, these officers. I understand, in spite of the 1945 Act, still suffer certain abatements of their pensions. In any event, abatements were made in the past. If the Minister wants to do something to help the morale of the force I suggest that he should take up this question in the case of those men who may not be able to get promotion and thus have their long service to the country recognised in that way. The Minister, I think, ought to give them some recognition by looking into the question of the abatement of the pensions which they have in so far as that has not been remedied by the 1945 Act. Now, of course, there will not be openings for promotion if the force is allowed to dwindle and if the establishment falls, so that if the point made by Deputy Cowan were to be considered, a sine qua non for that would be, I imagine, the maintenance of the establishment.
As I have mentioned, the morale of the force, maintained under two successive Governments and now under a third, has been excellent. The members of it have given very efficient service. I think it is not unfitting to recall some things at this stage. The morale of that force has been high. During the war years few people in the City of Dublin, or in the country as a whole, realised what they owed to the Gardaí in conjunction with the Army. We are now dealing with the Gardaí and their part I say was conspicuous. During the years of the emergency, the ordinary citizen went his way, and even though he knew there was a war in Europe and saw his own troops around the thing did not touch him, but in that strained atmosphere the ordinary system of law and order went on, and the silent work of the Gardaí was responsible for that. If we got through the war years in peace and with no social upheaval here it was largely due to the devotion of that force. The years have passed and we are apt to forget things, but few people realise, because of the efficiency of that force, what they were spared, and I am afraid that we are inclined to forget now the sacrifices that were made by that force. We forget, for instance, the detective officer who fell riddled with Thompson-gun bullets in Rathfarnham; we forget another officer who was murdered near his own home during that time. I am glad to say that that tradition has followed the Gardaí, and that we still have officers who can unarmed face guns in the hands of a criminal. There were two officers of the force decorated recently for bravery of that nature.
Now, the morale of that force must be maintained. The ordinary citizen hardly knows what is owing to it and how much is owing to it, and we should all, irrespective of where we sit in this House, be solicitous for the well-being of the force. I have no apologies to make in pleading for exceptional treatment for that force, seeing the part that it played in maintaining the social fabric of the State, and seeing the way they have discharged their duty—the fidelity and devotion with which they discharge their duties. For that reason, I think I can join with other Deputies in pressing on the Minister if it is necessary—I am not suggesting that it is necessary but I simply add my voice to theirs—to consider the problems relating to the Gardaí in a sympathetic manner, and to realise that he is dealing with a loyal and a tried force, a force with a high morale. I think the country will be only too glad to furnish the necessaries for maintaining the force at the standard which is required. The Minister need not hesitate in adjusting conditions which will improve the lot of the Gardaí or tend to improve their efficiency.
There are other matters which arise on this Vote, of course. People are getting perturbed about the incidence of road accidents of a certain sort. I made a promise on the Local Government Vote to raise this matter with the Minister. One is always in the awkward predicament in this House that, in referring to the type of offence to which I wish to refer now, one can hardly ever get a time when a charge of this nature is not pending and when a Deputy has got to be careful so as not to prejudice such a proceeding. Notwithstanding all that, I am talking perfectly generally now and without any reference whatever to any particular case. It is desirable that some comment should be made on the question of competency in driving motor cars. When I say competency, I mean both a permanent physical capacity to do so and a temporary physical capacity to do so. Some steps will have to be taken in the interests of the public, of the ordinary man in the street and of the ordinary driver, to see that nobody drives a mechanically-propelled vehicle who, whether by an act of his own in consuming certain liquor or otherwise, or from any other cause, is incapable of driving that car with the degree of skill which modern conditions require. No person should be tolerated driving a vehicle on the road unless he is able to afford that degree of skill. I am afraid that the position will have to be faced where, if a person puts himself in danger of diminishing his capacity to drive below that minimum of skill required and then attempts to drive a motor car, he will have to be very severely treated indeed, and all other considerations will just have to be put out of the case.
Too many people have been killed on the roads. Too many people have been maimed. If a person is free but if he, by some act of his own, diminishes his capacity for driving and then drives, he will have to answer for it. I am afraid we shall have to face up to that situation. All sentiment and such like apart, there is only one remedy for it, and that is a severe sentence of imprisonment. Fines are not sufficient. In fact, unless there is a direction under the present system, the position may easily be that a driver of a commercial vehicle who has been guilty of such an offence when convicted and unable to pay the fine is sent to jail, while, on the other hand, somebody who is relatively opulent and who is coming from some place of amusement, when convicted, is given a big fine. It is a big fine, but it is only a fine. He pays it and that is that. Of the two hypothetical cases which I have given, surely there is a greater case for leniency in the case of a man who is earning his bread and butter, not so much for his own sake as for the people depending on him. In the other case there is no excuse. But at least some mitigating circumstances can be pleaded in regard to the man who is sent to jail. The other gentleman only pays money. The time is approaching when some very definite action will have to be taken in such offences and when a severe sentence of imprisonment will be the only remedy.
This brings me to another point. I want again to mention that I am talking generally with regard to these crimes and I am talking with great reserve because of the danger that anybody might think I was referring to anything specific. The point I want to make is that it became the habit some time ago—I do not know under which Attorney-General it happened—automatically to prosecute for manslaughter where a death had resulted in a road accident. I think that was a mistake in policy. If one looks at the record of what has happened in these prosecutions it will be seen that invariably, generally anyway, such a prosecution has resulted in a dismissal and a prosecution for dangerous driving or anything like that afterwards has brought very little in the line of punishment. I am thinking in particular of a case which was decided so many years ago that it would be difficult for anybody who might even remember it to associate my speech in this House this evening with it in which a man was prosecuted for manslaughter. A jury, who would perhaps have convicted him of another crime, hesitated to convict him of manslaughter and he was allowed to go. In the District Court, on a lesser charge, the district justice, rightly feeling that to do otherwise would be to usurp the functions of a jury, strictly limits the penalty to the legal level of the charge with which he has to deal, the net result being that in a very bad case a man gets off very lightly. I remember reading that at a time when I saw in the same newspaper that, for a relatively minor offence—I mean relatively, when compared with the one I have just mentioned—a taximan was deprived of his licence and so lost his livelihood.
These inequities and these discrepancies in our prison law can only be met by abolishing this question of manslaughter, unless you can establish the facts that would normally lead to manslaughter in other cases—some extra grave feature which makes you bring it as a manslaughter charge as distinct from a motoring offence. A special provision should be made for dealing with these cases. After all, why judge the offence from the public point of view just by the fact whether the person was killed or not? Our attention is naturally drawn to the seriousness of the case if a death results, but when all is said and done the serious angle of that offence has happened before, in that the person who was responsible has firstly made himself incapable of driving and, secondly, has been driving improperly. That is the real offence and that is what we have to deal with in a different way. Some people would be lucky enough to escape death in an accident caused by such a person while others would be killed. It is a mistake, however, to judge it merely on the question of death. In either case the criminal driver is equally guilty whether he has been fortunate enough to escape actually killing his victim or whether the accident has had a fatal result. The crime is the same. The danger to the community is equally great. I do not think a differentiation should be made just on the actual consequences of that particular case. Realising as I do the difficulties he is up against in this matter and the difficulties of framing such a thing, and realising that the ultimate sanction of law depends ultimately on public opinion, I cannot, in conscience, ask the Minister to do the impossible, but I can ask him to have the problem considered.
I suggest that, now that the motor car has come back on the road, when we have reason to fear that such crime is on the increase, the practice of levying manslaughter charges neither covers the case nor is effective. The ultimate sanction rests with public opinion. We have to make people realise the criminal nature of the act of any person who, by his own act, renders himself incapable of driving a car or—equally dangerous—the person who, by his own act, puts himself in a position where he might be likely to lose his skill in driving a car. Such a person taking over control of a motor car is nothing short of a criminal. He is in the same category as a man who would wantonly discharge a gun up a frequented highway without caring to look whether people were there or not. Certain measures must be taken sometimes for the public good and in the case of this public evil strong measures will have to be taken to remedy it. At any rate, the problem could be examined, particularly as regards the practice of prosecuting on the basis of manslaughter when some other method might be more adequate to bring a better penalty. That penalty, in any event, should be imprisonment, if the charge is proved.
There is a question that the Minister suggested to me when he was opening. He said it was a consolation for the taxpayer that if he expanded the Land Registry the fees would compensate for the expansion. It has been a cause of considerable complaint in recent years that the fees in the Land Registry have been excessive. Last year on this Vote, when I was sitting on the far side of the House, certain representations were made by me about the costs in this regard. Many of us have pointed out from time to time that the difficulty for the ordinary citizen, especially the poorer man, in having his legal rights asserted or determined is often the question of cost and that a large proportion of these costs to him comes from administrative charges, such as Land Registry and court fees. Many of these are necessaries, in the sense that they occur on the devolution of title on a death and must be considered necessary in the succession of lives; and to that extent they are part of the costs of certain living people. These, together with the charges for conveyancing and stamp duties, are often a burden on the poorer man. They often occur where there are no great charges from professional men—legal charges in the way that some people think of them, such as those of the country solicitor. If the Minister is considering the Land Registry, as he obviously intends to do in connection with the old chestnut of delays, perhaps he would deal with the question of fees and see if they could be adjusted in the case of poorer categories where small holdings are concerned. That should be done, if they have not been adjusted already; and I must confess that my information is not exactly very recent in this respect.
In the case of Dublin City, the traffic problem, as well as other factors, has resulted in parts of the city being relatively poorly policed. It is not the fault of the Gardaí, as there is not sufficient of them there. Many citizens feel that they have not the security which they had years ago. There are many areas of the city where years ago the policeman on his beat was a familiar sight and where nowadays a Guard is rarely seen. That gets back to the old problem of supplying a force of sufficient strength in Dublin. Having made my general plea, I would ask the Minister to consider also the specific police problem in the city and to remember that things have changed for the Gardaí as well as for other people in modern times. The single man on the beat, except as an observation patrol, is hardly likely to be effective in dealing with the criminal as we find him developing to-day. He must be reinforced by something else—perhaps the combination of the detective and the uniformed man, for general patrol work of that nature, is the best we can do. The patrol car has only a limited application. I noticed in an English paper recently where certain people there were agitating to get their men back on the beats, and the phrase was used that "the patrol cars charging around everywhere are not able to deal with crime." The solution obviously is a combination of the two. You need the patrol car and also the man on the beat, but the latter is not much use unless reinforced, preferably by a detective suitably equipped.
If we were able adequately to police the city, the incidence of some of the smaller crimes—such as housebreaking, larceny and so forth—might be reduced. We know that our Guards can be very efficient. If we look back upon the bicycle stealing during the emergency we must realise the efficiency with which the Guards handled that problem and solved it as an earnest of what they can do if given a chance. As I have said so many times already, they require not only the requisites for being efficient, but the requisites essential to the building up of a good morale and, above all, the essential requisite of the confidence and support of the central executive.
I do not propose to delay the House very long but there are one or two suggestions I would like to make to the Minister. Like Deputy de Valera, I have a good deal of sympathy with the Gardaí in the position in which they find themselves at present. I do not think the solution to their problems lies in an increase in the actual force itself. I think the best line the Minister could take is to restrict as much as possible the duties of the Gardaí to what are really Garda duties. In other words, their duties should be restricted to the maintenance of law and order in so far as the criminal code is concerned rather than that they should be made servers of notices of all descriptions or the distributing point of forms for completion. That is a practice which has grown up during the emergency. The emergency has now gone and the time has come when the Minister should tell those of his colleagues in the Cabinet, who are responsible for placing these duties upon our Gardaí, that they must find some other means of having that work done.
Deputy Cowan outlined very specifically the difficulties under which the Gardaí operate at the present time, particularly in regard to beats and meal times. I would suggest to the Minister that he should consider the possibility of supplying mobile canteens in the City of Dublin so that at certain points at certain times hot coffee and sandwiches would be available for Gardaí on night duty or for men who might find themselves unable to get a meal or unable to obtain one at a price within their normal budget.
Much has been said about the difficulties under which the Gardaí work at the present time in regard to the traffic and parking problem in Dublin. I would earnestly urge upon the Minister that he should consider the parking problem as one outside the scope of normal Garda duty. Perhaps in that connection he would examine the system that has been adopted in Australia. There they have a force under the control of the police but delegated to one specific task. That task is the policing of car parks. This force does not require the same degree of competence, general knowledge or specific police knowledge necessary in the police force proper. As parking is mainly a city problem, I think the Minister could usefully take up with the local authority in the bigger metropolitan areas the possibility of establishing some kind of parking police. In that way the Gardaí would be relieved of the onus of wandering from street to street taking the times and numbers of cars, and wandering back again after a certain period to see if the permitted time has been exceeded. If such a force could be established, more of the trained personnel would be available for normal Garda duties.
With other Deputies in the House I would like to pay tribute to our Garda force. I think they deserve the utmost consideration the Minister can give them to ameliorate their conditions. Many Guards have suffered under transfers which have created a definite grievance in the force. In many places they are living under impossible conditions. In some places they cannot find accommodation for themselves and their families. I would urge upon the Minister, as Deputy Cowan and Deputy de Valera have done, that he should give this excellent force every possible consideration and every practical consideration that he can.
I want now to deal with a problem with which Deputy de Valera has already dealt. I shall approach the problem from a different angle from his, but ultimately I shall arrive at the same effect. The time has come when motorists who are in an advanced state of intoxication will have to be put into a special category where specific penalties will be laid down and where there shall be an irrevocable decision by a court of summary jurisdiction with regard to the driving potential in the future of a person convicted of the crime of being drunk while in charge of a motor car. Very serious accidents have been occurring on our roads. There are enough hazards on the road to-day without adding to them the hazard of indiscriminate driving by motorists under the influence of drink. The Minister will have to face his responsibilities in that matter. I do not think it is the ultimate result of a man's condition that should be his guiding factor. I agree with Deputy de Valera that it is not the consequence of the action that should be the guide as to the level on which to set the crime. The problem should be approached from the point of view that any man driving a modern car when his condition is such that he is mentally and physically incapable of adequately and properly controlling that car is taking on to the road a more deadly and lethal weapon than a machine-gun. The Minister's attitude will have to be that there must be a summary, severe and ready-reckoning for such people.
There is one particular matter to which I wish to draw the Minister's attention. In the Minister's Department there was a certain official. He was subsequently appointed a district justice, but before his appointment he served in the National Army in a legal capacity. I would ask the Minister to consider his case with a view to permitting him to reckon his service with the Army as Judge-Advocate General for pension purposes. This is an unusual type of case and I urge it on the Minister for his sympathetic consideration because there is a continuity of service on the part of this individual and I understand the addition of the number of years involved would substantially benefit him when he retires.
There was one other matter to which Deputy Little referred. I should like to assure the Deputy that no member of the legal profession, no matter to what political Party he belongs, would take it as an insult to be offered a judgeship, and Deputy Little need not worry too seriously about the argument addressed to the House that all judicial appointments made by the late Administration were made purely on merit. I am honest enough to believe in the saying, to the victor to a certain extent the spoils, and I suppose one of the spoils that one may associate with political Parties in the matter of judicial appointments is that the legal supporters of the winners have a fair claim on the judgeships. That has been the system since the commencement of the State, and I have no desire that the present Minister should in any way change it.
I should like to bring to the notice of the Minister the position of District Court clerks. Apparently they are a forgotten battalion in the Department of Justice. Those people render a very useful service outside their ordinary official duties. They act in the capacity of philosophers, advisers and in various other categories throughout rural Ireland. I would not like to say too much about the remuneration they get for their official services. I would like the Minister to consider favourably any appeal that is made by those people in the future to improve their conditions.
There is another matter I would like the Minister to consider. In 1933 a certain force was recruited. The majority of its members were old I.R.A. They served with distinction as Gardaí, but for pensionable purposes their period of service was very short and it would not afford them the amount necessary to keep men of their age in a position similar to that which they held before being discharged. I should like the Minister to consider taking their I.R.A. service, even though it may not be taken in full; they could take a certain service that they gave in the I.R.A. and add it to their Garda service, so that they would come out with a full pension. I am sure that every Party in the House appreciates that these men have earned such treatment.
With regard to prosecutions for dangerous driving and other serious offences of that type, I think we are too lax. As Deputy Collins said, a man driving a motor-car has a useful conveyance, but it can very easily be turned into an instrument of destruction—and a very destructive instrument it can be. When a man is brought before the court he may get a severe sentence. What should be taken into consideration is the loss of life there would be if a man takes drink to excess and, in his motor-car, exceeds the speed limit, as any man under the influence of drink is inclined to do. There should be more serious penalties to bring that type of person to his senses and to afford protection to the community, protection to which they are entitled and which it is incumbent on us as a Parliament to give them. Accidents, sometimes fatal, are occurring on the roads every day.
During the debate on the Local Government Estimate, Deputies were asking for autobahn roads, but I am afraid if we do not take steps to restrict the speed merchants the autobahn roads will be turned into death-traps for the people of this country. If a man drives a car while under the influence of drink and he is caught by the Garda, his licence should be forfeited and he should never again be permitted to drive. That is the only way to bring these people to their senses and it is the only way to protect the public. I remember reading at one time I Met Murder on the Way. Every day you go on the roads of Éire you meet murder on the way. It is not premediated. Through a slight deviation of the steering-wheel, or because of something that causes a blank in the mind of the driver, that man can become a murderer within a second.
Something should be done to bring the seriousness of this matter to the minds of drivers now on the road and potential drivers who may take up motoring as a vocation. The only way effectively to bring it to their minds is by imposing very drastic sentences. Anybody committing a crime, such as is being committed every day in the week on the roads in this country through faulty driving or being under the influence of drink, should get something more than a suspended sentence, with the licence held up for 12 months. In my opinion, penal servitude and taking the licence off motor drivers for ever, is the most effective lesson they could learn.
I believe the Minister has control over the Chancery Division. There is a very noticeable lack of staff there. The discharging of some estates—I do not know if that is the proper legal terminology—had to be held up for a long time because of lack of staff. The Minister should pay attention to that matter and supply the staff necessary to carry out the work more rapidly.
I should like to say one thing in conclusion, and that is that the Garda force has been a credit to this country since its initiation. The Garda deserve everything good that we here can give them. I hope the Minister will consider an improvement in their conditions and also consider the possibility of relieving them of certain duties imposed on them during the emergency and so make them what they were intended to be—officers for the prevention and detection of crime. I am sure these men will appreciate very highly any steps taken to relieve them of work that is not concerned with the discharge of their ordinary duties. At the moment they have more duties to discharge than they are able to perform. I believe that the Minister in future when dealing with this body of public servants should bear in mind that they have under very adverse conditions carried out very onerous duties and that they can bear favourable comparison with any other police force in Europe or even in any part of the world. I hope that the Minister will give due consideration to my remarks so that the Garda will become a body of men marching on their objective—that objective being the prevention and detection of crime— quite satisfied as to the conditions under which they serve.
Deputies who have taken part in this debate have paid tribute to the Minister, the officials of his Department and especially the Garda. I wish to join in that tribute but I rise more especially to draw attention to a circular sent to every Deputy from the Garda Pensioners' Association, signed by John E. Conway.
Notice taken that 20 Deputies were not present; House counted and 20 Deputies being present,
I wish to draw attention to the fact that there are only five Fianna Fáil Deputies in the House when we are discussing the Vote for the Office of the Minister for Justice.
That is not relevant.
The Deputy might try to count the number of members of other Parties present.
I was saying that that circular bearing the signature of John E. Conway, ex-sergeant, Secretary of the Garda Pensioners' Association, draws attention to the fact that no account was taken, in the recent adjustment of pension allowances, of the claims of those members who retired prior to the 1st July, 1940, and says that keen disappointment was felt at this decision. He refers to the 1947 Pensions Act which excluded the Dublin Metropolitan Police, Garda and Royal Irish Constabulary men who retired prior to 1940. He goes on to say:—
"It has been brought to the notice of my association by a recent announcement in the Press that it is the intention of the Government to introduce legislation at an early date further to adjust Garda pensions on a still more equitable basis of a permanent nature. Having regard to modern conditions generally, my association again makes the request that in any readjustment of pension all members, including Dublin Metropolitan Police pensioners, whose number is now dwindling, be included in such a scheme. We trust that this final appeal will meet with favourable consideration."
As Mr. Conway says, the number of old Dublin Metropolitan Police is rapidly dwindling. Again the ex-members of the Royal Irish Constabulary who were promised, in words used by some of the leaders in public life at a certain time, that they would always have conditions not less favourable than those who remained in the service, have not had their pensions increased. They are suffering grave hardships and they complain that the last Government did not fulfil the promises made to them. They earnestly appeal to the present Government to fulfil these promises. I strongly support that appeal and I ask that those old hands should get reasonable increases in their pensions to enable them to meet the increased cost of living.
I also desire to be associated with the remarks of one of my colleagues who drew attention to the fact that there is growing discontent in the Garda and amongst the warders of the country. Their wages and conditions of service generally are not what they should be. The easiest way to ensure a contented public service, which is a great asset to any community, is to see that the personnel get good pay, fair conditions and reasonable pensions when they serve their country well. I hold that there are a number of various types of public servants in this category who are not treated as they should be treated. If one starts to talk about Dublin Metropolitan Police pensioners, Garda pensioners, ex-school teachers and all other public servants one would have to go down a very long list. One can only say that there is a number of Government pensioners of all sections anxiously looking to the Government to give them decent conditions and permit them to end their days without suffering hardships, because in many cases at present their allowances are not sufficient to enable them to purchase the necessaries of life. Some of them have pensions only just sufficient to bring them within the means test and to prevent their getting the old age pension. I hope the Minister will see to it that any of them who come under his control will get favourable treatment.
With regard to the transfer of Gardaí, there is no housing accommodation for them in Dublin and the allowance the Gardaí get is the same as it was 25 years ago. The rent allowance is insufficient, and I appeal to the Minister to see that, when transferring men, the allowances for rent will be sufficient to meet the demand made by those who have property for letting or sale.
Other Deputies have drawn attention to traffic conditions in this city. The traffic Guards do splendid work, but I have often thought how easy it would be to help them clear a traffic block, say, between O'Connell Bridge and the top of Dawson Street, St. Stephen's Green and around that area if we had half a dozen Guards on horses. They could step out from O'Connell Bridge, go around to Dawson Street and give a signal to the traffic Guard to let the traffic go in certain places. I remember when we had horse police in this city. They were a delight to see, and, if any Deputy saw half a dozen Guards on horseback rendering assistance in the clearing of traffic blocks, he would be very proud of both horses and men. I make the suggestion to the Minister that he should introduce the mounted Guard for this purpose. It would help to ease a position which is becoming appalling. In present conditions, it is easier and quicker to walk from Nelson's Pillar to Stephen's Green than to go by taxi or car.
I rose particularly to draw attention to the conditions of those who are expecting better treatment from this Government in the matter of pay and pensions. It is a long time since the allowances given to the Gardaí for boots and upkeep of clothing were increased. The cost of these things has doubled and I hold that the allowances should also be doubled. Looking down the Estimate, I note that the commencing salary of a Garda is something under £4 a week. Who can live on £4 a week now, even when living in barracks? I might add also that the Minister ought to inspect the barracks and see that the conditions of the single men living in these barracks is improved.
As has been said by other Deputies, we are all proud of the Gardaí and of their achievements, and of the Minister's staff generally. I join with other Deputies in congratulating the Minister on the position he has accepted and I express the hope that, at the end of the year, many improvements on the lines put forward by Deputies will have been brought about.
I join in the appeal made by my colleague, Deputy Keane, in connection with members of the Gardaí who came into the force very late in life. They are mostly Old I.R.A. men and, because of the age limit, will have to go out early and will find themselves in very straitened circumstances. I should like also to call the Minister's attention to the position of the section of the community who get no pay. We have heard about various people who wanted increases of salary for something they did or did not do, but I should like to put before the Minister the position of jurors. On Monday last, I happened to be in Cork and I met a number of my colleagues, some from Deputy Halliden's area and more from the far western points of the county. They were all collected there, something over a hundred of them—dragged away from their businesses to serve on juries. Deputies are paid for coming here and county councillors get their travelling expenses. Everybody who attends any kind of court is paid—even the prisoner is paid when he gets his sentence—and I think the time has arrived when something should be done with regard to the men who are dragged away from their businesses to serve as jurors. One of these men told me that he had to get up at 4 o'clock that morning in order to milk his cows and get his business done before coming up to serve his country for the day at his own expense throughout. I think it is unjust and unfair, and I suggest to the Minister that he ought to turn his attention to that matter.
I was very worried by Deputy Cowan's statement in connection with Guards being charged and disciplined because, in plain language, they had no cases. The Minister and I have a mutual viewpoint as to what should be the duties of a good Guard. Speaking in the House some time ago, the present Minister said in the Official Debates, Vol. 88, No. 3 of 14th October, 1942:
"I knew the sergeant to be a reliable, steady officer. I thought that there would be no harm, if I met him accidentally, to mention the complaint to him, which I did. He said: ‘Everybody knows that on Sunday I enforce the licensing law until 1 o'clock. While the bona fide traffic is on from 1 o'clock to 8 o'clock I do not run into every pub to see who is in it because I know that Paddy and Johnnie, who have been working hard all the week, are getting a pint. I am not going to follow those people. When the dance hall opens at 8 o'clock and when a bunch of brats come, armed with poteen, take a few glasses, distribute the rest and then go down to a pub and get a couple of pints, to throw on top of it which sets them mad—these people I will prosecute and persecute so far as lies in my power.’ I said: ‘Good luck to you.’ That is a situation in which a Garda sergeant was himself legislating.”
