A disturbing feature of the crime report for 1961 is the large number of persons under 17 years of age charged with committing indictable offences who were convicted or against whom the charge was proved and who got the benefit of the Probation Act. The figure, 3,333, is the highest figure for any year since the foundation of the State. The problem of juvenile delinquency which we, of course, share with every other country, is a difficult and many-sided one and no country has so far come to any satisfactory conclusions as to how it can be eradicated. We have nothing like the problems that even our near neighbours have, but I think, and I have already expressed this opinion, that the problem is acute enough to warrant our tackling it as earnestly as possible and doing so now. now.
I was heartened to hear of the remarks of an eminent police officer from another country who attended a convention in Dublin of the International Federation of Police Officers in May last. Speaking of delinquency, he mentioned how lucky we in Ireland were to have problems of such small dimensions and within such narrow fields, a situation which he attributed to the stability of our home life and the strong religious atmosphere which appeared to him to be everywhere about. These remarks, encouraging as they are, do not mean that we can view our situation with complacency. On the contrary. As I have mentioned elsewhere, my Department is now entering into a fresh study of penal reform and I hope that on this occasion next year I shall be able to report definite progress.
The House will be already aware that in September I set up an inter-Departmental Committee to inquire into the present methods for the prevention of crime and the treatment of offenders and to recommend such changes in the law and practice as the Committee consider desirable and practicable. The matters to which the Committee will give particular attention are: juvenile delinquency; the probation system; and the institutional treatment of offenders and their after-care.
The Committee have, I am glad to report, got down to their job in commendable fashion; at present three sub-committees are engaged in the investigation of matters affecting the medical care, general education and employment-on-discharge of persons committed to prisons and institutions. It is not the Committee's intention to delay making recommendations until they are in a position to present a comprehensive report but rather to submit their proposals according as they reach their conclusions as to the particular steps which should be taken. In fact, I have already received from the Committee a number of recommendations involving changes in prison administration and procedure and having, in the main, as their aim the social rehabilitation of the offender. Some of the recommendations are already in course of implementation but others, which involve recruitment of personnel and structural alterations or require Departmental planning will naturally take some time to implement. Of course, these changes cannot be made without cost but I feel sure that when the time comes to look for the money I will have no difficulty in getting the full support of the House.
I do not propose now to go into the Committee's recommendations in detail but I would like to mention some of the major recommendations. One proposal calls for the intensification of treatment for offenders who are in need of psychiatric treatment and suggests the establishment in Mountjoy Prison Hospital of a special 20-bed unit for all adult prisoners requiring psychiatric hospitalisation. Allied to this proposal are recommendations for the training of special staff to deal with mentally disordered prisoners and the provision of occupational therapy. The establishment in Mountjoy of a corrective training centre which would cater for selected prisoners who through training and guidance could be fitted to take their place as normal members of society is also proposed. The prisoners selected for corrective training would be completely segregated from other prisoners.
The Committee have recommended strongly the appointment of two prison welfare officers. In the Committee's opinion, these appointments are essential, if the full aims of social rehabilitation are to be achieved. Another proposal also strongly recommended is that serious consideration should be given to the question of securing alternative premises for St. Patrick's Institution. It is the Committee's view that the essential facilities for providing worthwhile instruction in education, trades and physical training cannot be provided in the present premises.
I should like to emphasise that I have no intention of making changes for change's sake, but once I am convinced that new methods or intensification of old methods or changes of direction would lead towards an appreciable diminution of crime, or greater rehabilitation of offenders, I will not hesitate to take the necessary steps. I need hardly say also that I shall welcome any proposals that may be made to me by Deputies about any of these matters.
Turning to non-indictable or summary offences, we find that the biggest single factor in the total of over 104,000 persons who were prosecuted in 1961 was, as usual, the number of persons proceeded against under the highway code—77,834 or almost 75 per cent.—an increase of 9,201 over the figure for the previous year. The increase in the number of such prosecutions can be attributed in large measure to the ever increasing number of vehicles on the roads; 326,641 vehicles were registered at the end of 1961, as compared with 302,767 at the end of 1960. To some extent, too, of course, the increase in such prosecutions reflects the constant vigilance of the Garda in seeking to make the roads safe. But altogether too much of the time of the Garda has been taken up in the prosecution of trivial motoring offences and I am glad to say that a new system comes into operation shortly which permits a motorist who offends against the law in certain minor respects and who accepts his culpability, to pay a fine of 10/- in the local Garda station within a limited period. If he wishes, of course, he can go to court. I think that the new system will be welcome to the motoring public, to the police and to the courts.
I am appalled that there are so many people who are careless, if not actually reckless, in their driving habits. The number prosecuted for dangerous or careless driving, 3,772, was well up on the figures for previous years and no less than 651 persons were prosecuted in 1961, for driving while drunk, as compared with 535 in 1960, and 479 in 1959.
Before leaving the Garda Vote, I think I should mention as I announced some time ago that I have become persuaded, on looking at the police reports and by the many representations made to my Department in recent years, that something must be done to control airguns firing leaden pellets. The modern airgun is so powerful and so dangerous in the hands of young boys that its unrestricted use should not, in my opinino, continue to be permitted and I intend to introduce an appropriate amendment of the Firearms Act as soon as possible.
Vote No. 25 is the Vote for prisons. The Estimate, at £283,240, is £40,310 more than last year's. The bulk of the increase is in respect of increases in pay agreed to at Conciliation Council and the allocation of 28 extra prison officers—of whom eight were recruited during the past year. The main reason for this increase in staff, is that, in accordance with an agreement at conciliation proceedings, the working fortnight for prison officers has been reduced from 96 to 90 hours.
Extensive alterations and improvements to the officers' quarters are planned and I think I can say that the staff in the prisons service are reasonably contented and are doing their jobs conscientiously. I have visited the prisons and St. Patrick's Institution and have seen for myself how well the prisons are run. But Deputies do not have to take my word alone for that: all they need do is to ask for permission to come and look for themselves —I will welcome their interest. Alternatively, they can read the very worthwhile reports of the visiting committees which are published in the Annual Report on Prisons, copies of which are placed in the Library each year. On one or two occasions during the year, complaints were made that the food was bad or that the prison discipline might be too severe, but on direct inquiry by the supervising staff in my Department and on reference to the visiting committee of the prison concerned, each complaint was proved to be groundless.
Prison is not, and is not intended to be, a home from home and a prison will always be a place of punishment, but it seems to me that our prisons nowadays must to an increasing extent become places of rehabilitation as well. In so far as rehabilitation may save a person from the misery and degradation associated with a life of crime, it is entirely justifiable on humanitarian grounds alone. In addition, however, it can be regarded as something which brings a positive benefit to the community as a whole. It can mean the difference between a former prisoner continuing as a burden on the community or becoming a useful member of society.
All connected with the prisons service — particular members of my office staff, the governors, the chaplains, medical officers, the prison officers and the visiting committees are concerned to do what they can for the rehabilitation of prisoners. And in that connection I must make special reference to the Guild of St. Philip, a section of the St. Vincent de Paul Society which is devoted to the after-care of prisoners, with particular reference to young and first offenders. There are over 700 branches of the society throughout the country which enables the guild to hold out a helping hand, no matter where a discharged prisoner goes. During the year, the guild gave over 800 interviews to prisoners and ex-prisoners with a view to their after-care and disbursed the full £1,000 grant which they got from the State.
I, myself, am of the opinion that, more than any other single element, the provision of suitable, permanent employment on discharge is the greatest safeguard against a relapse into crime and I should like to make a special appeal to all employers to do what they can when approached in this regard.
The enactment of the Criminal Justice Act, 1960 was a most useful piece of legislation in the field of penal reform. It enables the courts to commit young offenders direct to St. Patrick's Institution instead of to prison, and to remand them there whilst awaiting the trial of their cases. It also enables the Minister to approve of remand institutions for boys and girls, with the result that homeless girls, charged with offences, can now be sent to a convent instead of to prison whilst the cases are awaiting hearing. One of the main provisions enables the Minister to grant temporary release to persons under sentence or to criminal lunatics who, in the opinion of those in charge of them, are not dangerous to themselves or others.
I find that the exercise of my powers in this respect does a great deal of good. It has never been abused. It is invariably praised by the visiting committees, chaplains and governors of prisons and the medical superintendents of mental hospitals. During the year under review, the power was exercised in respect of 27 prisoners and 30 mental patients. So far, I have been feeling my way but I have received so many encouraging reports as to the good effect on the morale of prisoners and patients of being given periods of temporary release for special purposes that I contemplate a more extended exercise of my powers in this regard.
As I have already mentioned elsewhere, I have in mind to examine closely the whole field of penal reform. I am aware, in a very general way, of the efforts at penal reform that are going on in Britain, in Denmark, in France and in other countries. This year and last year, I attended conferences of European Ministers of Justice and I was impressed with the evident anxiety on all sides to establish a code of prisoners' rights and to find better methods of dealing with juvenile delinquency. It is a problem of worldwide dimensions, in the solution of which, I hope, this country can play a part. When I attended these conferences, it was brought home vividly to me, how small the incidence of crime is here in Ireland, both relatively and absolutely. I was able to point out last year that the daily average number of male offenders over 16 years of age in custody was only 44 per 100,000, the figures for female offenders was only one per 100,000 and that the total number of offenders in custody was less than 500 at any one time.
To go back for a moment to the figures in the Volume of Estimates, I would refer to the provision of £4,200, an increase of £3,600, in Subhead L of Vote 25 which is necessitated by a recent amendment of the prison regulations in regard to the payment of gratuities to prisoners who are well conducted and industrious. The new arrangement increases the gratuity from a penny a day to 3/6d. a week. Half the money may be spent on cigarettes, sweets and the like and half is put to the prisoner's credit for his use on discharge.
I would mention, also, that before leaving office as Minister for Justice, Mr. Traynor's last official public act— on 8th October—was assisting the President, in the presence of next-of-kin, the Taoiseach, the Lord Mayor of Dublin and other public representatives, at the unveiling of a memorial to the patriot dead interred in Mountjoy Prison. The cost of the memorial, which is in the form of a 12-foot granite cross on a prepared base, is borne on the Prisons Vote and the smallness of the expenditure was made possible by the voluntary, unpaid work of members of the prison staff and of the Office of Public Works. It is my intention that the memorial may be visited on the first Sunday in November in each year. I would ask all concerned to make arrangements for their commemoration visits on that one day.
The total number of persons committed during the year 1961, whether on remand, for trial or under sentence, was 2,469—2,208 males and 261 females. The daily average in prison was 447—as against 461 in 1960— which was inclusive of an average of 116 juveniles in St. Patrick's Institution. I am glad to say that the reports of the prison visiting committees make very encouraging reading. In particular, the report of the visiting committee of St. Patrick's gives a great wealth of detail in relation to the way the boys are treated in the institution and about their after-care. The 1961 Annual Report on Prisons has recently been published. But, mutatis mutandis, the report contains the same kind of encouraging views from the visiting committees as were published in the report for the previous year.
The next Estimate, No. 26, is that for the Courts of Justice and, at £412,660, is £50,390 more than last year's. The increase is due almost entirely to the cost of grade awards and the "eighth round" increases. There has been little change in the staff of the courts: the number of district court clerkships has been reduced slightly by the amalgamation of certain posts according as vacancies occur. Provision has been made in Subhead A for allowances to members and officers of the Special Criminal Court, £3,145, and in Subhead B for the travelling expenses of members of that Court, £1,180—provision was made for these items in previous years in the Estimate for the Department of Defence. As the Court is no longer in operation, expenditure in connection with it will be less than the sum provided.
The Courts of Justice and Court Officers (Superannuation) Act, 1961 provides, in relation to members of the judiciary and certain court officers, that, in return for a reduction in the amount of pension, a death gratuity after five years' service or a lump sum on retirement will be payable. Persons serving at the time of the coming into force of the Act were given the option of retaining their existing rights. Provision was also made allowing of the surrender, at the time of retirement, subject to certain conditions, of portion of the pension payable in order to secure a pension for a wife or for one nominated dependant. These provisions are in the general lines of other superannuation schemes and were formulated so that they will involve no greater burden on the Exchequer than the previous system.
Provision has been made for the increase of the remuneration of members of the judiciary by the Courts (Supplemental Provisions) (Amendment) Act, 1962, by amounts corresponding to those already awarded to the Civil Service. The salaries are, of course, payable from the Central Fund.
With the publication in August of the new Rules of the Superior Courts, a task which has gone on, with interruptions, for some 25 years, has now been completed. The Rules Committee have gone to a great deal of trouble and expenditure of time in the past 12 months in bringing the Rules up-to-date. We are indebted to them.
During the year, three distinct sets of District Court Rules were made by the District Court Rules Committee. The District Court Rules (No. 1) 1961, provided for the revision of the practice and procedure of the district court in relation to the service of summonses and the service of documents outside the jurisdiction of the State. They also have provisions in relation to the issue of notice to defendants in regard to fines. The District Court Rules (No. 2) 1961, revoked the existing Rules relating to affiliation, maintenance and enforcement of court orders and made new provisions in regard to these matters. The District Court (Gaming and Lotteries Act) Rules (No. 3) 1961, provide for the regulation of the practice and procedure of the court for the purposes of the Gaming and Lotteries Act, 1960. I am aware that the Rules Committee have also been working on a costs and fees order. I should like to express my thanks to the Committee for the very excellent work done by them during the past year.
When promoting the Courts Establishment and Constitution Act last year, my predecessor mentioned— Vol. 187, Col. 1062 — in connection with the provisions for the appointment of a President of the District Court that he would be charged with the duty of ensuring the prompt and efficient discharge of the business of the court. One of the matters mentioned then was the necessity for securing as far as practicable general uniformity of practice and procedure in the administration of justice and the standards to be adopted in fixing the amount of penalties. The Act authorities the President to convene meetings of justices periodically to discuss matters of this kind. My predecessor made it perfectly clear that there was no question of interfering with the freedom of any individual justice to award the penalty he might think appropriate in a particular case but the intention was that the individual justice could benefit in a general way by discussion with his judicial colleagues as to what would be the appropriate penalties in hypothetical circumstances. In that way a general level of uniformity of penalties would be brought about.
I was sorry to learn that the question of uniformity of penalties did not come up for discussion when the justices convened last December. My experience, meanwhile, goes to show that there is a very real need for such a discussion as there is a wide disparity between the penalties imposed by some justices and the penalties imposed by the great bulk of their colleagues in relation to particular charges. In particular, I would refer to the disparity of penalties on convictions of minor charges under the Road Traffic Act—offences such as illegal parking or failing to stop at a stop sign, etc.— which carry a monetary maximum penalty of a few pounds. I am referring now to cases not having any aggravating circumstances. One or two justices have been wont, in trivial cases, to disqualify the person concerned, for driving, for periods of weeks or a couple of months. Such penalties are never imposed by the very great majority of justices. It seems to me that they are disproportionate in their severity, threatening, in some instances, the loss of a defendant's livelihood and I have acceded to petitions for the restoration of licences in a number of such cases.
On the other hand, we have all, I am sure, been surprised from time to time to read of cases in which confirmed blackguards are treated with what seems to the outsider to be excessive leniency. I do think, therefore, that there is a very real need for the justices to take steps amongst themselves to bring about uniformity or near-uniformity of penalties. I understand that magistrates in other countries meet from time to time for such purposes and I can see every reason why the 35 justices in this country should come together occasionally for objective discussions as to their judicial functions. I do not think that any person with an understanding of the practicalities of the situation could see objection to such a discussion, and I do not think that the judicial discretion of individual justices could possibly be impaired.
I am glad to say that the reorganisation of the district court has worked excellently since 1st April, 1961. Although the number of justices was reduced to eight metropolitan justices, 23 provincial justices and four movable justices, there has been no need to appoint temporary justices. Emphasis has been and will continue to be placed on the prompt discharge of district court work and on the elimination of delays.
Vote No. 27 is the Estimate for the Land Registry and Registry of Deeds. At £143,960, the Estimate is £19,140 greater than last year's and again the rise is due almost entirely to salary increases. Both offices continue to cope with a considerable volume of work. While there have been complaints of delays in the Land Registry, I can assure the House that my Department have taken steps to eliminate these delays as far as possible. Arrangements have been made for a bonus incentive scheme which, it is confidently estimated, will increase the staff output by 30 per cent. and it is hoped that all arrears in the Land Registry will have been cleared off by next January. The scheme envisages that in each month arrears of dealings will be reduced by 275; copy maps by 150; searches by 60; Labourers Act cases by 940; and Land Commission cases by 125. According as the staff clear the arrears in one sector, they will go to others.
During the year, the central office and the counter space have been enlarged and these improvements should facilitate the public in their dealings. Arrangements have been made, furthermore, for a fairly substantial extension of the building, costing several thousands of pounds, for the proper storage of records.
I do not propose to make more than a simple mention of the fact that a Registration of Title Bill has been drafted and should be ready for introduction in the next Dáil session. It will be a comprehensive measure, running into a great many sections and it will I am sure be carefully examined and fully debated by the many Deputies interested in this field when it comes before the House.
The final Vote for which I am responsible, No. 28, is the Estimate for the Offices of Charitable Donations and Bequests. The net Estimate, £7,730, is £560 more than the Original Estimate for last year and the Supplementary Estimate of £400 and it is due to general increase in remuneration. There is no change in the staff structure. I have already mentioned that the law in relation to charities has been amended and consolidated by the Charities Act, 1961, which introduced several substantial improvements and I should like to take this opportunity of thanking the Commissioners for their advice and assistance in the preparation of that Bill and for the invaluable skilled service they give to the community in charity matters.
In conclusion, may I express my sincere thanks to all those members of voluntary committees and boards for which I have parliamentary responsibility, both present members and those who have retired during the past year? I should like to place on record how appreciative I am of the conscientious and able manner in which all concerned have carried out their tasks.
