asked the Taoiseach whether the Attorney General considers that he has any function in asserting the rights of the public to the continuance of train services and to the use of railway stations which are being withdrawn or closed with effect from 13th June, 1960 on the Westland Row-Bray line notwithstanding the failure of Coras Iompair Éireann to publish notice of its intention to withdraw such services and close such stations as required by Section 19 (3) of the Transport Act, 1958.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Withdrawal of Railway Services: Functions of Attorney General.
3.
Mr. Ryan
The powers of the Attorney General in relation to asserting public rights are normally invoked by some party complaining of infringement of a public right and making application to the Attorney General for the allowance by him of appropriate proceedings in his name at the relation of the complaining party. In such cases the complaining party (known as the relator) conducts the proceedings through his own solicitor.
No complaint was received by the Attorney General concerning the proposed discontinuance of train services or closing of stations on the Westland Row-Bray railway line or of any legal inadequacy in the notice given by Córas Iompair Éireann of its intentions in respect of services or stations on that line.
Mr. Ryan
Would the Taoiseach not agree that in a case of this nature it would be unfair to expect a private individual to bear the cost of any litigation which might be involved? In the circumstances would it not be a job for the Attorney General, in the name of the people, to prosecute a statutory body which appears to have failed to comply with requirements laid down by this House?
I pointed out that no complaint was in fact received by the Attorney General in this instance.
Mr. Ryan
With respect, I think the Taoiseach is well aware of the public outcry.