I listened to Deputy McGilligan last night and his remarks led me to believe that his one ambition was to report progress in order that he could bring forward some very important points this afternoon. He spoke of the state of national emergency and asked why it had never been revoked. He pointed out that the war has been over for 16 years, and said that surely something should be done. I am not familiar with the arguments for and against this matter but I do know that during six of those 16 years, Deputy McGilligan and his colleagues were in charge of the affairs of State.
It would seem to me that if Deputy McGilligan was so intense about it, he would have succeeded in convincing his own colleagues that there was a necessity to take action. If he could not convince his own colleagues, I am quite sure the Government must have ample reason for not acceding to his request. After all, he had the opportunity to deal with it and nothing was done. We have come to expect from Fine Gael and, if you like, from Deputy McGilligan, in particular, negative criticism and no constructive proposals. As I said, I thought Deputy McGilligan was trying to fill in time so that he could bring forward some very important points here this afternoon which he wanted reported on the radio and in the Press, the morning papers and so forth. I came here this afternoon to hear the points, but apparently Deputy McGilligan had no point at all.
We have also noticed efforts from the far side of the House in recent times to create the impression abroad that there is discontent among the Garda Síochána, that they are dissatisfied about their pay and conditions, and that they have a very real grievance. In his usual fashion last night, Deputy McGilligan dwelt on the matter and attempted to build up the impression that that discontent in fact exists. I should like to know if I am right in thinking that now, for the first time, the Garda have arbitration and conciliation machinery available to them, and that all matters of pay and allowances are dealt with by that machinery. If that is so, I should like to know what is the reason for the discontent. The remedy of conciliation machinery, with ultimate resort to arbitration, is available to the Garda to settle all questions. If I am not right in saying that, I hope someone will tell me what the position is, but if I am right, the House must agree with me that this campaign is absolutely dishonest and deplorable.
I should like to congratulate the Parliamentary Secretary and the Department of Justice on the improvements in the activities of the Garda Síochána during the past year. Some laws which were never seriously enforced in the past are now being enforced. No matter what people think of the law, it is being enforced. It is the same for everyone. Surely in a democratic society, we must all approve of the principle of one law for everyone, with no special concessions for special people.
I also think the addition of the Ban-Garda was very useful to the Force. The introduction of the white batons and the white coats and so forth have done a lot to improve the appearance of the Garda and their ability to control traffic. These new developments are certainly very welcome. We can be very proud of our police force. They are all well-educated, intelligent, courteous and efficient men and women. The improvements in regard to traffic control, and the fact that the general appearance of the Garda has improved, will give a very favourable impression to tourists.
Last year, I requested the Minister to consider the addition of mounted police to the police force. Last night our bloodstock got a tremendous boost in Italy. With the tremendous reputation our bloodstock has all over the world —racehorses, hunters and working horses—a mounted police force would not only be a benefit to our growing export of horses but an addition to the tourist attractions of the city. In that way it would help to further the national economy. Mounted police have considerable advantage in dealing with traffic jams and controlling gatherings of people likely to become disorderly. The Minister should seriously consider providing mounted police for Dublin, Cork and Limerick —the major cities, at any rate.
I have a word of criticism in regard to the new traffic regulations. We have been urged by the Parliamentary Secretary to endeavour to drive in traffic lanes in the city centre. Many streets where parking was previously permitted are now restricted. The purpose of this is to encourage traffic coming out of or into the city to drive in double lanes. Unfortunately, you get the occasional lorry or horse and dray from Guinness's, perhaps unloading in places where waiting is either restricted or prohibited. As a result, it is impossible to get this double lane of traffic. I have particularly in mind Bachelor's Walk and Pearse Street. I do not know so much about O'Connell Street. Bachelor's Walk and Pearse Street are streets where there is a great deal of loading and unloading.
The only people I can think of who suffer from this restriction are the owners of licensed premises. In places like Pearse Street, a number of people on their way from work used to pull in and stop for a drink before going home. They now go further out of town to have that drink. Maybe that is a good thing. Unless we can arrange for collections and deliveries to be made early in the morning or late in the evening, the "no waiting" idea is not working for the simple reason that it takes only one lorry or dray to force drivers back into a single lane. When people see one parked vehicle they will not drive in traffic lanes because they fear they might get caught behind the parked vehicle. The remedy would be to restrict the hours of delivery, to prohibit deliveries being made during peak traffic periods.
There is another point I brought up last year which, I think, should be considered again. There are a number of parks owned by Dublin Corporation. These are controlled by park rangers employed by the Corporation. These park rangers have not got the power of arrest. In the event of somebody committing an offence in the park, the park ranger must go to the nearest telephone and call the police. The policeman cannot enter the park unless he is invited to do so by an authorised person because these are private parks owned by the Corporation. In other words, there can be no police patrol in a park.
In my own constituency we have a very fine new development in Shaw's Wood, where there are a number of football pitches, tennis courts and some very attractive walks. It is wonderful to go there on a Sunday and see hundreds of youths playing there while their mothers and fathers enjoy the nice surroundings. But occasionally a small number of hooligans come in and start to cause trouble, beating up, perhaps, a couple of small girls. Unless the park ranger calls up the police, it is quite likely he will not be strong enough himself to restrain this kind of activity. I have seen some of these gangs with bicycle chains and so forth. There has actually been an incident of a park ranger having to go to hospital because he tried to prevent this type of conduct. If the Minister is not prepared to make arrangements to have the parks included in the normal police patrols, at least telephones should be provided at several spots to enable the police to be called quickly. Under the present arrangement the offenders inevitably get away before the police arrive. If the Minister has any views on this matter, I should like to hear them when he is replying.
Some years ago, at the request of the Lord Mayor, there was a report on vandalism and juvenile delinquency in Dublin. I have the document here, but unfortunately there is no date on it. Many of the items dealt with in this would probably come under the Departments of Education, Local Government, Social Welfare and so on, but a few would come under the Department of Justice. One is the censorship of films and books. We know that a lot of these very low type papers and picture comics have been done away with and that the traders and wholesalers here are rather careful about the type of literature they import for general distribution. But one portion of this Report says:
Film censorship is reasonably effective for adults but there is a case for the adoption of some form of discrimination between the films suitable for all ages and those which might be harmful to juveniles.
There has been a lot of argument on both sides as to whether we should have a less rigid form of censorship for adults and a grading of films on the English system, that is, "A", "U" and "X" certificate films. I invariably question my own children when they are going out to the pictures and try to influence them as to what pictures they should see. But when they have their few shillings in their pockets, I have no guarantee that these are the pictures they will go to. It may also happen that you have a major feature film ideally suitable for children along with a supporting feature absolutely unsuitable for them. I have come across that in a suburban cinema recently. The Minister might like to set up a small committee to examine further this question of film censorship or have his officials do so. The film censor is doing a very good job, but certain films harmful to children are, unfortunately, available to them. I understand that the report points out that book censorship presents a more difficult problem. The committee were assured by the Censorship of Publications Board that they are particularly concerned with publications which might scandalise the young mind and that they will do everything in their power to ensure that these publications do not circulate.
Another practice which is to be seen in Dublin quite often—I have seen it myself in my constituency—is a young child coming into a public house with a jug—the jug this child had was an aluminium jug—to have it filled with porter or stout for his father or mother, do not ask me which. I saw that happen rather late in the night, about 10.30 p.m. I feel that at that stage a child had no place in that public house. It was a time when some people were slightly merry, if you like to say so, and some of the stories were certainly not suitable for the ears of children. I drew the attention of the publican to it. He said that the child came in every evening as his father was not well.
I can understand that there is a human side to all this, but efforts must be made to prevent children from going into public houses and into betting shops. A matter I feel very strongly about is tolerating children begging in the streets. That might best be dealt with by the policeman on the beat who might give them a good fright rather than by any direct action of the Department. All these things contribute to juvenile delinquency.
I think I am right in saying that the incidence of crime and juvenile delinquency was on the decline last year. Perhaps that can be attributed again, in relation to this report, to the better economic circumstances of most of the families in the city. As long as the young teenager is walking the streets with no employment and despairs of getting employment, he is very susceptible to suggestions which are likely to lead him into crime and trouble. The fact that the unemployment situation is not as serious as it was some years ago contributes largely to the reduction in deliquency in recent times.
I have had experience of going along to the Children's Court in Dublin Castle and making representations on behalf of children who I felt were just swayed. There might have been only one bad fellow among the lot of them. Somebody might have said: "Look at that packet of cigarettes: we ought to swipe it," or whatever it might be, and the lot of them might then find themselves in court.
I want to pay a tribute to the judge in the Children's Court which I have attended. He is understanding. He deals admirably with the situation and conveys to the child the seriousness of the offence. He does not remand the child, unless he is an habitual offender and obviously needs corrective training. In that respect, I know that some excellent work has been done in St. Patrick's Institution on the North Circular Road but I should like to query the Minister on the question of prison reform.
I do not think I can blame the people opposite in this instance, but there is the feeling in some circles that we are falling behind in the matter of prison reform. Personally, I do not think this is so, but to the best of my knowledge there has been no authoritative statement to show that it is not so. When he is replying, I should like the Minister to outline what has been done and what exactly is the general thinking of the Government in regard to prison reform, in order that the public may understand the position and compare how this country is dealing with that matter in the light of action by other countries.
My constituency is about 75 per cent. working-class and contains municipal housing areas. A problem that arises there is the cost of litigation. If a man without adequate means wants health services, there are Health Acts which enable him to get assistance from the State for specialist and institutional services. The amount he has to pay towards these services depends largely on his income.
In the Dublin Corporation housing scheme, we have a system of differential rents. That was first proposed in the Dublin Corporation by the Labour Party and eventually it was adopted. The purpose behind the differential rents scheme is to enable the local authority to house people of small means who could not pay an economic rent. The idea was that the State would contribute, the local authority would contribute and the tenant would contribute towards the cost of the house in accordance with his means. We have that principle in housing and health.
If a man has a genuine case for litigation, he may be denied justice because he is afraid of the costs involved. I do not know how the Minister can deal with this problem. Perhaps it can be dealt with in some way similar to the health question. It is socially desirable to do so. The Government should devise some ways and means whereby the working man can get justice, whether or not he has money in the bank. A man earning £7 or £8 a week is as entitled to justice as the man earning £1,000 or £2,000 a year. This problem will require a great deal of examination but the precedents are there in the Health Acts and in the differential rents scheme. It is highly desirable that some system of subsidisation be worked out for people of moderate or low means and we can be sure of getting the cooperation of the legal profession.
Another question which I raised last year relates to the two years' extension granted to superintendents and higher ranks of the Garda Síochána with Old I.R.A. service. This extension, to the best of my knowledge, applies only to superintendents. Last year, I requested the Minister to consider extending this facility to, shall we say, the noncommissioned officers, the inspectors and sergeants. These men served the country just as well as their counterparts in the higher ranks. They are in responsible posts and, subject to their passing the necessary medical tests, I see no reason why the extension should not apply. I ask the Parliamentary Secretary to make a note of this for special consideration and I hope this time next year, it will not be necessary to repeat what I have said.
We have had a great deal of criticism, particularly from Deputies McGilligan and Ryan, about the appointment of a Parliamentary Secretary to the Department of Justice. We had a reference to what Deputy O'Malley said on the question some years ago, to the effect that the then Minister for Justice was not fully employed. I agree that Deputy O'Malley at that time was quite right. Since last night, I made a point of going to the Library and looking up the amount of legislation that has been going through the Department in the past few years and I think that never before has the same amount of legislation been framed in the Department as in the past year or two. Never before has the Department been responsible for so much activity. I congratulate the Parliamentary Secretary on his speech in Clery's a week or two ago and I think we can all feel assured that the Government are fully aware of their responsibilities, so far as the Department of Justice is concerned. They have certainly laid down a programme which will give us every confidence in them.
