Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 6 Feb 1964

Vol. 207 No. 4

Committee on Finance. - Vote 23—Office of the Minister for Justice (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:

"That the Vote be referred back for reconsideration."

—(Deputy M.J. O'Higgins).

Mr. Dillon

The substance of the Minister's reply to the last supplementary question was the topic on which I was speaking when progress was reported. I was saying, quite frankly, that the decision we took during our period in Government to move Borstal from Clonmel and put it in the immediate vicinity of Mountjoy Prison, under the name of St. Patrick's, was a mistaken decision. I hope it will be revised. I hope that Borstal institution accommodation may be found in some environment which is not closely associated with an ordinary criminal prison. I know that a good many people are disillusioned somewhat with Borstal treatment but I am firmly convinced that, where you are dealing with adolescent delinquents, there is a grave obligation to make the maximum effort to redeem them before they are irrevocably launched on a criminal career. I do not want anyone to labour under the belief that I suffer from the illusion that the inmates of a Borstal institute are all misunderstood angels. I fully appreciate that neither the Garda authorities nor the judiciary, who deal with adolescent delinquents, send them to institutions unless they are satisfied that no probation procedure will operate to control them. Fully conscious of the fact that many of them are very tough operators, I am still satisfied that, at that age, we are bound to make the maximum effort in the best surroundings we can provide to pull them back from the criminal career on which their own folly threatens to launch them.

We must, I think, content ourselves with the knowledge that, if we achieve a 60 per cent degree of success, that is something about which we can be gratified. If we can raise the percentage to 70 or 80, so much the better. But, even if we only achieve 50 to 60 per cent rescue work among these adolescents, then our solicitude for them will be abundantly justified. We must have present to our minds also the fact that until we can provide optimum surroundings for this work of redemption, there will be a natural reluctance on the part of the judiciary to commit youths to a Borstal institution and, very often, for the want of training at that crucial time in their lives, they are lost.

I should be glad, therefore, to hear further from the Minister as to what he has in mind as the alternative to the present accommodation which, I understand, it is the intention of the Government to wind up. I hope it will be possible to provide a new institution, preferably in rural surroundings. I am aware of the fact that a good many people hold it is important to have such an institution in or near Dublin, because that is where the majority of the inmates come from, and it is desirable to maintain some contact with their families. I have never been fully persuaded of the validity of that argument. I am not at all sure that it is not a good thing to have a period of break, albeit humanitarian considerations would require us to provide facilities for parents to make such visits as the regulations permit. Transport does not present an insurmountable difficulty.

In essence, Borstal treatment does not envisage frequent visits by parents or friends, any more than those of us who went to boarding school habitually received visits from our parents or relatives. Indeed, it was not good for those of our companions who got such constant visitation. It is much better for youngsters to settle down, going home for the holidays. So it is in Borstal institutions. Regulations will permit parents reasonable visitation, but it is better for these youngsters to go through their period of training and emerge at the other end with the sense of purpose and character that that training is designed to give them.

I have never been as much impressed as others with the idea of having Borstal in the immediate vicinity of Dublin but, if it is located in suitable surroundings, and those happen to be near Dublin, I see no objection to that. I believe there ought to be a new establishment where the best we can provide in the form of treatment will be available for these young persons. The Minister has on a previous occasion announced his intention to build somewhere in the vicinity of Lucan a new institute to take the place of the present place of detention located in Marlboro House.

Mr. Haughey

Actually it is Finglas.

Mr. Dillon

Am I to understand that we will continue the existing system of administration whereby the Minister is responsible for the detainees at Marlboro House up to the threshold and, thereafter, the Minister for Education takes over? I think that is bad. I think one person ought to be responsible. Dividing responsibility in this way creates a most serious situation. But I am primarily now concerned with the fact, and I have repeatedly made representations to successive Ministers for Justice in this regard, that in Marlboro House we are not dealing with adolescents. We are dealing with children.

I do not share the view of Deputy Dr. Browne that all children are angels and that there is no such thing as a bold boy. But I do firmly believe that if any considerable percentage of the children who become so incorrigible as to require their apprehension by the Garda, and arraignment before the Children's Court, are suffering from some measure of psychological disturbance, that degree of psychological disturbance requires expert investigation before a proper informed decision can be taken by the district justice as to how these children may be finally disposed of.

The extent to which abnormal and obnoxious conduct by children can be due to psychological disturbance, either in the children themselves or in the families from which they come has never been fully recognised under our administration of justice in the Children's Court. Unless there is proper observation of these children on remand, suitable investigation of their psychological condition and proper inquiry into their family circumstances, the most regrettable decisions may be taken. Children may find themselves planted in institutions for the rest of their juvenile lives when they ought not to have been sent to institutions at all; when, in fact, they should have been given treatment in their own homes, or when, in fact, their mothers and fathers should have been offered treatment they might stand in need of.

I want to ask the Minister again: may we assume there has been provided suitable psychological examination for children sent to Marlboro House for detention? I said to him on a previous occasion that I understood if he applied to the leading psychological authorities on children for assistance in that regard, it would be made available to him. I do not know whether he ever made such an application or not. Before giving that undertaking to the Minister, I asked a member of the profession: "Suppose the Minister is not in a position to employ child psychologists, would you be prepared to provide assistance voluntarily?" The reply I got was: "You can confidently assume we will, if he asks for it." I stated that on the Minister's Estimate last year. So far as I know, up to very recently no such application has been forthcoming from the Minister.

This service is most urgently necessary and ought to be provided. The purpose of it is that the district justice of the Children's Court should not finally dispose of any juvenile brought before him, without having before him a report on the psychological behaviour of the child and a report as to whether, in fact, the child is suffering from any psychological disturbance. It is only in the light of such a report that he can properly make appropriate provision. If the public rumour that the Minister does not intend to remove the Borstal to Portlaoise is untrue, perhaps the Minister would tell us what he proposes to do about it? May I assume he is going to remove it from the premises in which it now is?

Mr. Haughey

That is the intention.

Mr. Dillon

But the Minister has not yet determined whither it is to go?

Mr. Haughey

I may say I am almost at my wits' end to find somewhere suitable. We have explored numerous possibilities.

Mr. Dillon

I fully appreciate it is a difficult problem. You do not want to provide jail, and yet you have to have a place with a reasonable measure of security because you are dealing with a mercurial body.

Mr. Haughey

You must have plenty of open space.

Mr. Dillon

Yes. One of the things you are tempted to speak of is an open prison. But you have to remember you are dealing with adolescents. You cannot be sure you can get from disturbed adolescents the same measure of co-operation as you would get from adults fitted for proper prison treatment. If you put excessive temptation in the way of mercurial adolescents by tempting them to escape, you are multiplying their difficulties. I appreciate the Minister's difficulty in resolving that problem. I hope he will be able to overcome his perplexities and find suitable premises where a reasonable measure of security can be maintained and, at the same time, the kind of accommodation both he and I desire to provide.

There is one last matter: the scale of pensions provided for widows of gardaí. This is a problem that afflicts us all, no matter in what walk of life we are. If we are employed, with provision that at the end of our term of employment we are to have a liberal pension, that does not give a man the kind of security consonant with real peace of mind. There is always the ghastly prospect hanging over a man who depends on his own labour to maintain his family as to what will become of his wife and family should he prematurely die.

We have fixed a reasonable enough salary and pension scale for Gardaí, but I feel the scale of pensions for the widows of gardaí is still a cause of legitimate grievance. I think the present scale is at just that level which makes it impossible for the widow of the garda to qualify for non-contributory widow's pension. I would suggest to the Minister that either of two things be done: either the scale of the widow's pension should be reduced, or regulation should be made by the Minister for Social Welfare that, for the purpose of non-contributory widows' pensions, the Garda pension should not be regarded as income. Either course would do something to relieve the present situation, but a continuation of a situation in which the widow of the garda does not qualify for social service benefit pension and is expected to survive on the extremely exiguous provisions at present made must cause very grave concern to a large body of men, who would wish to see their terms of employment established on a basis which would give their widows a reasonable degree of security in the event of their own premature death.

The Minister, perhaps naturally, is much preoccupied with what he conceives to be his own achievements. I have no fault to find with a volume of legislation designed to codify the law or regulate the law relating to pawnbrokers or anything else. But I do not think he should forget that the primary function of the Department of Justice is the preservation of law and order in the land. He is wholly mistaken if he believes there is not a very considerable amount of anxiety abroad at the growing number of crimes particularly offences against the person. He is greatly mistaken also if he believes that the failure to apprehend the murderer of the lady in Ballybough has not caused serious apprehension in the public mind. I would urge upon him that some reassurance on this important question should be provided in his concluding observations.

I am not forgetting that when this matter was raised in the House before, the Minister said—and fairly reasonably said—Deputies should not forget that the Garda often know who has committed the crime. Of course, a crime cannot be returned as having been detected and disposed of until the criminal has been brought to court, been proved guilty and a conviction secured. In our circumstances, it is difficult to get the kind of proof requisite to secure conviction and therefore prosecutions very often do not take place, even though the Garda are virtually certain of who is guilty of the crime. I acknowledge that difficulty exists, but, without unduly labouring the point, I think keeping the Garda in close contact with the people could and would materially contribute to the disappearance of that difficulty.

Mr. Tully

I should like to take up the point on which the last speaker has concluded and to remind the Minister that when I put down a question last week to get some information on the way the Ballybough murder had been handled, I had no intention of trying to assume the responsibility which is the Minister's and that of the Garda authorities, nor had any other of the members of this House who have been making inquiries about it. The Minister must realise, being in touch as he is with the Force throughout the country, that there is unrest not alone among the general public but among the rank and file of the Garda because of the way in which this and other cases have been handled.

As regards crime detection, while the Minister read out an impressive list of the numbers of murders which have been detected over the years, nevertheless he must admit there are far too many of these cases going undetected. The last speaker referred to the fact that in many cases the Garda know who the person is but because they cannot definitely prove it, no prosecution is possible. I suggest to the Minister that if the Garda know and if there is no possibility of getting further proof, in the interest of justice, whatever proof they have should be brought before the court. It is ridiculous to find, as happened in one case a few years ago, neighbours putting up placards on somebody's gate and accusing him of committing a crime. That apparently continued until quite recently in that case and yet the Garda authorities were not prepared to take any action. In the interest of everybody concerned in cases like that, the matter should be clarified once and for all.

On the question of the Ballybough murder, it is quite true that the general public believe, and that the rank and file of the Garda believe, that nothing was done until it was far too late. The steps taken were not the correct ones and when eventually patrols started to stop cars in the evening and in the night, nothing resulted. In one case a patrol stopped a young man and his girl friend and tried to persuade them they were the people for whom they were searching, weeks after the murder had been committed when it was the easiest thing in the world to check who they were. That is not good enough. I myself was stopped late at night and I do not think I resemble in the slightest way either of the people in the identi-kit. I do not even wear a red coat.

The general public believe in regard to the Ballybough case that far too much information was given, that every assistance was given to those people to change their identity as far as possible and to prevent their being arrested and that this matter should have been dealt with in another way. I am not an expert on these things and I do not propose to offer solutions to the Minister. However, if it is true that when a serious crime takes place, no positive action can be taken by the Garda authorities, by the uniformed gardaí, until such time as the people who are at the top, who are in fact civilians, put on their deerstalker hats, get their magnifying glasses and start looking into the matter, then the matter is not being handled in the proper way.

With reference to the number of cases of housebreaking in the city and throughout the country, and, as the previous speaker mentioned, particularly of assault upon the person, it is true there is a great deal of unrest. In this case I am not blaming the Garda. Apart entirely from the blame attributable to parents who are allowing their growing-up children to do things they should not do, a lot of blame rests with the courts.

It is ridiculous that when cases are brought to court, somebody who has been before the court again and again on a series of housebreaking and other such charges can get away with a sentence of a couple of months or a suspensory sentence, given chances again and again. It is quite a common thing in this city that people who have been charged and who have succeeded in getting out on bail feel free to commit as many offences as they possibly can in the time at their disposal before they appear in court again. All they have to do is to ask that these additional charges be taken into consideration and they finish up with the same sentence as if they had committed only the original offences with which they are charged.

There are also cases of which I am sure the Minister is aware where children have gone into shops and grabbed money out of a till and the gardaí have reached the stage where they believe there is no point in charging them. If they are brought before the court, they get a pat on the head; they are told not to do it again and then they go back and do exactly the same thing again. The whole procedure of the courts must be changed.

Another thing which I think is wrong in court and which I believe must be changed is that where there is what is referred to as a State witness in connection with some minor charge of, say, breaking into a car and stealing property out of it, that person who may have been passing by and witnessed that, when he comes to court to give evidence, in many cases is cross-examined more by the justice than the person charged with the crime. A person who comes into court to make an identification should just do that and should not be subjected to that sort of thing. It does not help and it discourages people from giving evidence which otherwise they might give.

Car stealing has reached alarming proportions in the city, and all over the country, and people who have been involved in a series of car stealing offences have got away with a few months. The Minister may say the law is there and ask how can he deal with them at this stage. He could usefully point out that the present system for dealing with these offences has not succeeded. I have no objection to anyone getting a chance if it is his first offence, but if he continues to offend, the sentences should not be concurrent but consecutive. I believe that would help to solve the problem.

The other day I asked the Minister how many people from outside this State were charged with speeding, and the Minister said that no statistics of that kind were kept. He also said that as a man of Northern Irish extraction, he did not believe people from Northern Ireland were breaking the speed limit. I travel up and down 30 miles of the Dublin-Belfast road every day, and I know it has become a joke on that road. Most of the people from Northern Ireland who go through the villages on that road do not slow down. Ninety per cent of the people from across the Border go through them at any speed. There is no point in trying to prosecute them because they can go back across the Border and, apparently, we cannot follow them. There is no check to find if they come in here again.

The Minister will have to introduce special fines for those people. For example, a person may be in a hurry when going through the village of Swords, but he will slow down to 30 miles an hour, and five, six or seven cars with Northern Ireland or English registrations will pass him at 50 miles an hour. Ordinary drivers will not tolerate that situation, and the Minister will be encouraging breaches of the law if he allows it to continue. The present regulations do not seem to be of much assistance, but the Minister must do something about it to show the people who are doing that sort of thing that they will not get away with it. There are law-abiding people from Northern Ireland who will not break the speed limit. We have to obey their regulations. If the Minister is not prepared to take my word for it, I am sure he will have seen reports that interested people in the Northern counties along the Border were prepared to send a deputation to him protesting against the people who drive at any speed through built-up areas. I do not want to labour the point, but I feel it has gone beyond a joke now.

The Minister should also devise an improved method for detecting the speed at which people from both sides of the Border drive. There are some people who think they should not have to drive at 30 miles an hour. They think they are beyond the law. They are usually irresponsible young people, or people who have not more sense, and when driving through built-up areas, they are a danger to the public. The danger is increased because of the fact that the local people know there is a speed limit, and accidents are caused which would not otherwise have been caused.

I live on the seacoast near Laytown and Bettystown. The road is pretty good, but it is not good enough to take cars at a speed of more than 30 miles an hour. Especially on Sundays in the summer, when there is heavy traffic, there should be some method of detecting speeds other than the system we have at present. I know there are Gardaí on motor cycles patrolling the roads from time to time. There should be more of them, but at least they remind people that there is a speed limit and, if they exceed it, they will not get away with it.

Itinerants, or tinkers, as they are called, have been referred to. The situation that has been allowed to develop in this city over the past couple of weeks is a shame. In my opinion, the Minister has very little responsibility for it. At the same time, the Government as a whole must see to it that these people are not simply driven from pillar to post. No matter what we think of their way of life, they should be given a permanent camping place, and if they are not prepared to accept it, they should be dealt with very severely. I am not aware whether or not some of the people who have come on the scene are alien to this country. I understand there are rumours that that is so. We know that vicious attacks have been made by some people on respectable citizens of this country. There is no justification for those attacks, but the excuse given is that when they are driven from an authorised site, there is no other site to which they can go except another unauthorised site.

We have this problem to a much smaller degree all over the country. The time has now come when we should be prepared to provide them with houses into which they can move and live like Christians. The local authorities will have to erect houses for them and prevent them doing what they are doing. It is all right to say they do not do much harm, that they just put a few horses in a field, but they move into an area and camp beside someone's house, as they do in the country, and where they find the dirt and filth which they leave after them is a mystery. They need be there only a few hours and they leave after them boots, old clothing, bottles and a lot of unmentionable stuff. They also go from house to house begging, but that is not the worst feature. They leave a couple of hundred yards on each side of the roadway in an insanitary condition. I suggest they should be taken off the roads completely and put into houses, and then there would be no further question of looking after them, or having sympathy for them because they are on the road.

I am glad the Minister recently decided to put into operation the new Bill dealing with guns. That is long overdue. Because of its recent passage through the House, I shall not dwell on it, except to say I hope the Garda authorities will enforce the law in the strictest possible way. Airguns are terrible things. Airguns in the hands of children are terrible things. Airguns have done irreparable harm and damage, not only to animals but to human beings. I know that pampered pets will be able to hold on to them unless the Garda are strict. I want the law enforced in the strictest possible manner, and anyone found harbouring —and I think that is the correct word—or holding on to an airgun for a spoiled child should be dealt with in the way which the law lays down.

I was interested to hear the reference to ground rents. We have heard enough over the years about them. It seems to me that while everyone is prepared to talk about ground rents, and to have a commission set up to consider them, there is a vested interest and a hidden hand which ensures that no matter how much we talk, nothing ever comes of it. Again and again, there have been suggestions that ground rents should be abolished or terminated in one way or another, but in every case we come back to the situation where ground rents are not only continuing but growing. It was bad enough with the old landlord who held on to ground rents but it has now become worse with the new landlords, the people in this city particularly, who should have more sense, and who are branching out down the country buying up land in order to create ground rents and put an added burden on unfortunate people trying to provide houses for themselves.

The Minister is assured of the fullest support of the Labour Party in ending that sort of codology and also in ending the system whereby people who have gone out of the country for a long time—in many cases for several generations—and have gone as far away as South America, are still extracting a hefty income from ground rents in this country to which, in the first place, they were never entitled.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

I was not here when the Minister spoke but I read his manuscript and I shall be glad if he would indicate in closing the debate what is the exact position in regard to Portlaoise prison and whether the rumours current to the effect that some other use will be found for the prison building are correct or not. I also wish to refer to the public concern in relation to the number of road accidents and fatal accidents which are occurring and have been occurring consistently in recent years. I appreciate that the Minister is not responsible for road traffic legislation but he has responsibility in regard to the enforcement of the law, being responsible for the Gardaí. I should like to know if any effort has been or is being made to prepare an analysis of the cause of road accidents. I do not share the oft-expressed view that when an accident happens or because a number of accidents have happened, the Minister or the Government should do something about it.

I do not think there is much in that approach but we should certainly reach a stage where a scientific analysis can be made of the cause of most accidents, whether caused by speed, as some suggest, or by insobriety as others say, whether it is a lack of regard for ordinary road regulations or is due to the condition of the vehicles being used. Perhaps it is being done but if not I suggest that the Technical Branch of the Gardaí should, where possible, compile scientifically their view as to what caused a particular accident. If that were done I think that much of what is being urged on drivers regarding road safety would have a more realistic appeal. If it is found on a fair survey that a constant cause of some of the accidents is that the steering mechanism is not as it should be or that many drivers are inclined to drive around bends and corners on the incorrect side or too far from the correct side—if things of that kind were pinpointed as major causes of accidents appeals made regarding road safety would be more effective.

As a practitioner in the courts, I find that in the Dublin area there is apparently some rule or regulation in force which prohibits a Garda witness attending at a consultation prior to a legal action or giving any information other than the bare minimum contained in the Garda report.

Mr. Haughey

Is this criminal?

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

No, civil proceedings. This particular rule so far as I am aware applies only in the Dublin area and I suggest the rule should be changed. The function of the Garda witness in any civil action or, indeed, any proceedings, should be to endeavour to assist the parties to arrive at the truth and enable justice to be done. It often leads to considerable trouble for a litigant if a Garda is put in the position that he will only give the information in court. That information may be so vital that if one of the litigants were aware of it beforehand they would never have initiated the action or would have taken steps to compromise and settle it at an early stage. It seems no useful purpose is served by the continuance of a regulation the basis of which I find it hard to understand. Perhaps the Minister would consider that matter in the interests of justice and within whatever safeguards are necessary allow Garda witnesses, who were present subsequent to an accident or who have information bearing on issues which are to be the subject of litigation, to operate in the same way as any other witness and give to either side before the court hearing such information as they possess.

If that is done both sides will know clearly what the evidence is likely to be if the case goes to court and can take their decision accordingly. As things are at present in Dublin, quite frequently nobody is fully aware of the nature of the evidence likely to be given by a Garda if he is called as a witness and it often has a very vital bearing on the issues involved. Frequently, if one of the litigants had been aware of the full story, the case might never have come to court. I suggest the Minister should consider this.

Mr. Haughey

A number of Deputies dealt with the same point and in dealing with any particular point, I may not at all times indicate which Deputy raised it. I hope if I omit to give the reference, as it were, to some particular aspect of the case, the Deputy concerned will forgive me.

I think I should begin by dealing with the question of the strength of the Force as a whole. This was raised by Deputy Michael O'Higgins and by other Deputies. I want the House, first of all, to be clear on exactly what year we are dealing with because the time of the year at which we are dealing with this Estimate tends to introduce a certain amount of confusion into the situation. But, at the beginning of the last financial year the strength of the Force had been fixed at 6,440 and we prepared our Estimate for this year, that is, for 1963-64, on the same basis, that is that the strength of the Force would be continued at 6,440. Subsequently, in his Budget speech, the Minister for Finance, in an effort to procure economies, cut the Garda Estimate to a figure which could have been achieved only by our postponing recruitment of 50 Gardaí who in the normal course would have been recruited in order to keep our strength at 6,440, so that we faced 1963-64 with a potential cut of 50 members in the strength of the Force.

During the year it became apparent that we could not possibly carry on with that cut in our strength and I was able to persuade the Minister for Finance to restore the situation, so that, in effect, the established strength of the Force remained at 6,440.

I agree with Deputies that in the current situation it is not possible to visualise any reduction in the strength of the Force. In fact, for the coming year I am asking the Minister for Finance to agree to a figure which will be up by 100: in other words, in the coming year, I am looking to the Minister for Finance to permit me to have a Force of 6,540, an increase of 100 over the present strength.

While I am dealing with strength, I might as well go on to the particular situation of Waterford, which is very dear to the heart of Deputy Lynch, and which he never fails to bring to my attention in some form or other. I could not agree that the strength of the Force in Waterford city or, indeed, Waterford county as a whole, is in any way inadequate. Waterford is a divisional headquarters and we have there one chief superintendent, a superintendent, two inspectors, 11 sergeants and 47 gardaí.

Mr. T. Lynch

Nothing.

Mr. Haughey

I admit that Waterford is a large thriving metropolis but I do feel that this force should be adequate to police the city properly. I have had no complaints from the officers concerned that the force at their disposal is inadequate and I am not aware that they have ever sought additional assistance and have been refused it. We have normally on night duty one sergeant and seven men who are assisted by a patrol car and just recently we have arranged for the installation of radio equipment in the patrol car.

Mr. T. Lynch

That is not enough in a spread-out city like Waterford.

Mr. Haughey

I can only go on the advice tendered to me by the officers whose responsibility it is to take care of these matters and, as I say, I have not received from them any indication that they regard the force at their disposal as inadequate. Indeed, it compares favourably with the strength for any other city in this country.

Mr. T. Lynch

What would the Minister think of spreading them out over the city and putting them into more stations?

Mr. Haughey

I am glad Deputy Lynch has raised that point because it is one that I am very anxious to deal with. Deputy Lynch and I disagree about this matter. I do not disagree simply as an individual; I disagree from the standpoint of the advice I get from the technical experts, namely, the officers in my Department in the first instance and the police officers in the second instance. As the Deputy knows, I received a deputation from the city and we discussed the matter very fully. I thought, at least, that the police officers were able to persuade us as civilians that the course which has been decided upon is the correct one. The simple difference between Deputy Lynch and myself on this point is that I favour the establishment of one central Garda station in the city of Waterford while Deputy Lynch thinks it would be better to have a number of smaller stations diffused over the city area.

The first argument against Deputy Lynch's view is that centralisation in modern times is regarded as good police administration but, apart from any technical police argument, there is this simple commonsense argument which I would like to put to Deputy Lynch again. If we have a number of small stations spread over the city is it not wasteful in manpower? Each one of these stations must have an orderly who is tied to the station.

Mr. T. Lynch

That would be good.

Mr. Haughey

But Deputy Lynch agrees with me that the more men we have on the streets, on the beat and in cars, the better.

Mr. T. Lynch

Yes, and have them in a place inside the barracks.

Mr. Haughey

We cannot have them on the streets if they are tied down on duty in the barracks. However, I do not think we can argue it much further. I want to assure the House that the experts are on my side. I realise that Deputy Lynch knows his native city very well and thinks he knows how it should be policed but, as against that, I have the best technical expert advice available to me and I am accepting it. We will just have to agree to disagree, I am afraid.

Mr. T. Lynch

I do not mind saying to the Minister that I have the advice of men who have spent their lives in the Civic Guards in Waterford and who know it.

Mr. Haughey

They do not give that advice to me. I am also concerned, indeed, with this question of the relationship between the Gardaí and the general public and the allied question of the Gardaí being able to have the co-operation of the public in procuring information of one sort or another. As Deputy Dillon rightly pointed out, the relationship between the Gardaí and the general public is excellent. The people here regard the Garda Force as their own and, on the whole, they are very proud of it and they definitely regard the Garda as a friend and protector. There is very little left of any lingering hostility between the general public and the police such as we had throughout most of our history in this country.

From that point of view this whole question of the closing of small rural stations is undoubtedly important. When I am presented with a proposal by the Garda authorities to consent to the closing of a rural station or to its reduction in strength, I always give the matter very serious consideration, because, like most Deputies, I am instinctively against the idea of closing any Garda station. I feel that the presence of a Garda station in a rural area, village or town is undoubtedly a good thing, a beneficial thing and something which helps to reassure people, if nothing else.

Mr. T. Lynch

There is no substitute for it.

Mr. Haughey

I am often faced with the position that I am assured by the Garda authorities that a station may be closed without loss of police efficiency and that an area can be just as well policed by dividing it up between the adjoining areas. As against that I have my own inclination not to close Garda stations and very often that is reinforced by considerable local opinion. On the other hand I must have regard to the public purse and when I have the assurance that the area is practically free from crime there is no reason from the police point of view why the stations should not be closed. In such circumstances it is difficult for me not to accede to the proposal to close the particular station.

The other aspect referred to is the question of the man on the beat. This is probably one of the questions most often debated. I would like to assure Deputies that there is no question of any decision to carry on by way of patrol car. Our approach to the matter is to supplement the Garda on the beat with mechanical aids of one sort or another such as patrol cars and radio communications. The fundamental basic structure of the Garda force is still the man on foot and what we are doing is to augment him by mechanical aids. It is a misconception of the situation to think in terms of the abolition of the man on the beat and the putting on of a patrol car as a substitute for him.

I want Deputies to bear in mind that aspect of the matter and also to have regard to this—that the patrol car or the man on the motor cycle has a great number of advantages over the man on the beat. They can move around much faster, can give greater supervision to any particular area and can come much more quickly on suspicious persons than the man in uniform can hope to do. I think we are working towards the ideal solution, maintaining the man on the beat as the basic structure of the force and helping him out and supplementing his activities by patrol cars and men on motor cycles.

I agree fully with Deputy Lynch that the number of cases of assaults on women and girls which we have on record do not reflect the true figures. It often happens that the persons concerned are reluctant to come forward in person and make complaints. It is probably true that there are more of this type of incident than we have recorded in the statistics. As against that I want to point out that some of these assaults which have become headlined in our newspapers have never taken place at all. I can give Deputies concrete examples of such cases.

Mr. T. Lynch

The ones which I read out did take place and men were sentenced for them.

Mr. Haughey

I fully agree. Deputy Lynch also asked me to do what I could in the interest of road safety. I agree that there is a very heavy obligation on me to do everything I can in the present situation in this regard. I would remind Deputies, however, that the primary responsibility in this matter rests on the Minister for Local Government who is the Minister charged with responsibility for road safety but both myself and the Minister for Education co-operated with him last December in a special campaign which he carried out to keep death off the roads in December. We cooperate to the full with the Minister for Local Government in anything he wishes to do in this regard and we never fail to avail of any opportunity to draw attention to this appalling toll of death on the roads and to use every effort to bring about a reduction in it.

It is encouraging to note that, whether because of the campaign or not, in the month of December, 1963, the overall total of deaths and injuries on the roads was less than in the corresponding month of 1962. That is something which we should feel grateful for. We would like to see it still less but we did, in December, 1963, succeed in keeping the figure below that for the previous year. This is something which is very satisfactory in contrast with what happened in Great Britain and the North of Ireland where the figures for December were considerably up on those for the previous year.

Deputy Desmond took me somewhat by surprise in his reference to what seemed like a big political scandal in some town in his constituency. I have been looking up the records since he spoke and I am almost certain that he referred to the transfer of a member of the Force from a town in his constituency during last Autumn. There is nothing sinister in what happened in that regard.

I, as Minister for Justice, and the Commissioner of the Garda received complaints from prominent persons to the effect that the Garda situation in that town was very bad. Reference was actually made to a crime wave. The Commissioner looked into the situation and decided to take a number of steps. He increased the strength of the Force in the town and also decided that he would transfer one member of the Force out of the town in the interests of efficiency and good police work. Subsequently, the member concerned submitted an appeal to the Commissioner on humanitarian grounds that his transfer should not be proceeded with because it would bring about a considerable amount of family upset. The Commissioner, as he is always prepared to do in cases of that sort, had regard to the humanitarian nature of the appeal and postponed the transfer for a period of six months.

The matter is as simple as that— an ordinary matter of police administration which had nothing to do with me or my Department and which was dealt with entirely by the Commissioner in accordance with good police practice and in the interests of good police administration. It is upsetting to find Deputies coming in here and giving colourful accounts of instances of this sort and trying to exaggerate them into something which they are not or could not ever be.

Some Deputies spoke about the Ground Rents Commission. I want to say, in reply to Deputy Dunne and others, that at least this Government have done something about the ground rents problem. People, as Deputy Dunne and others have said, have been talking about ground rents for a long time but the reference had been restricted to talking about them.

Mr. S. Dunne

Not entirely. There was a Private Bill before the Minister made any move.

Mr. Haughey

No, Deputy Dunne's motion——

Mr. S. Dunne

Bill.

Mr. Haughey

Deputy Dunne's Private Bill, as I remember it, came into this House after I had established——

Mr. S. Dunne

No.

Mr. Haughey

He had one Bill after I had established——

Mr. S. Dunne

It was before the Minister announced his intention of setting up a Commission. It had to be, because it was put in the day after the last election.

Mr. Haughey

It came to the House only after the Commission had been established.

Mr. S. Dunne

These are the mechanics of the House.

Mr. Haughey

I am prepared to accept that but when it came before the House the Commission had already been established. This Government is the first Government which have taken any practical step to deal with the problem of ground rents. We established what I regard as a first-class commission of people all of whom are experts in some particular aspect of the problem. I am hopeful that we will get a report from that commission very shortly. When we get the report, it will be up to the Government and the House to decide exactly what should be done about the problem. At least we have done that much and I think it is the sensible way to proceed.

It is a complicated and complex problem. Any Government would, I think, be reckless in attempting to deal with it without being fortified beforehand with the report of an expert commission. The Commission has, to my mind, at least, acted with commendable speed and promptitude and I am hoping we can get its report very soon now. On this question of ground rents, the conscience of this Government is clear and we have done something about it.

Many Deputies have spoken of the crime situation and referred in particular to the question of the solving of the murders which, unfortunately, have been committed here in recent years. I agree with Deputy Desmond that it is no answer for us to point to our particular statistics and say, in relation to them, that we are much better off than any other country in Europe or that they compare favourably with those of other countries. I agree that that is not the proper attitude or approach to a problem of this sort.

It is, of course, helpful from time to time to compare our situation with that of other countries. It helps us to have a sense of perspective when we study our situation in relation to that of other countries, but I agree with Deputy Desmond that we must consider our own situation as such and do the best we can in our circumstances without regard to whether we are doing better or worse than other countries. The proof of the matter, of course, is that we do not do badly in this matter of solving murders.

The overwhelming majority of murderers are brought to prosecution and justice in the courts. We have at present, because of a variety of different and indeed unrelated circumstances, seven murders for which nobody has been prosecuted in the courts. As I pointed out previously, that is not equivalent to saying that in all cases these murders are not solved. As Deputies know, in some cases it happens that the Gardaí are quite satisfied as to the identity of the person who committed the crime but they are still a long way from being able to establish satisfactory proof of that in court. Therefore, if you exclude those types of cases from the number of murders concerned, the remaining number which could accurately be described as unsolved is quite small indeed. However, no matter how small it is, we must face up to the fact that it is unsatisfactory in so far as there is any case of murder remaining unsolved.

I can only assure the House that the Gardaí as a Force are just as anxious and concerned about this matter as any Deputy in this House and that an all-out effort is made in every case to bring the perpetrators of murder to justice. Everything that we can do is being done. The Gardaí have all the specialised training which we can possibly provide for them. They go abroad to police colleges to keep in touch with the latest developments in other countries. They study the latest techniques. We procure for them the very best equipment we can and if there is anything else that they suggest they could with advantage use we do not hesitate to procure it for them.

When a crime of this sort is committed, every resource of the Force is brought to bear in an effort to apprehend the criminals concerned. I feel that from time to time it is inevitable that we shall have failures and despite the very best efforts of the officers concerned and the members of the Force concerned they will not succeed in solving a particular crime but I do not think that is any reason for panic or despair or wholesale criticism of the Gardaí as a Force. I think they do very well in this regard. It would be wrong to let the coincidental approximation, if you like, of some failures, discolour the whole picture, to create the impression that murder is a crime which is to all intents and purposes undetectable in this country. The real situation is that year in year out the vast majority of these crimes are solved and the persons concerned brought to justice. We must not let an occasional failure cast doubts on the efficiency of the Force as a whole.

I know that the recent murder in Ballybough has caused some concern among the general public—I know this particularly because Ballybough is in my constituency—but I can assure the House that every effort was made from the moment the murder came to light to apprehend the criminals and every effort is still being made. If the crime does remain unsolved and if the perpetrators do finally get away with their crime, I can assure you it will not be through any fault of the Garda or any lack of determination on their part.

Deputy M. J. O'Higgins asked a specific question about figures regarding the so-called "on the spot" fines. The position is that up to 31st December 1963 a total of 34,126 notices were issued by the Gardaí and the amount collected up to 24th January in hard cash in respect of notices issued before 31st December was £14,382. Roughly 84 per cent of persons paid the fine on the spot, as distinct from going to the court.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

How would it compare with court fines in the previous years?

Mr. Haughey

I am afraid I have not that information readily available. The fact that 84 per cent of the people who received these notices availed of the facility of paying on the spot rather than going to court proves that the system is working fairly satisfactorily.

Deputy Dillon asked about the delay in producing the annual Garda report. There is really a technical reason for that. It is because the crime year ends on 30th September but the figures published in the tables include cases which are disposed of in the courts up to 31st December following. In other words, any crime which is committed before 30th September in any year and is not finally dealt with in the courts until between that date and 31st December is included in the figures as published. This system involves a delay in having the report published.

Deputy Dillon is very interested in the penal reform programme and dealt with a number of aspects of it and asked some specific questions. Like others, he was interested to know about the future of Portlaoise Prison as such and also wished to find out what we had in store for St. Patrick's Institution. We have decided for ourselves that the present location of St. Patrick's is unsuitable and that its close proximity to Mountjoy is undesirable. It is easy enough to take that decision but is is very difficult to know where to go from there.

The best thing I can do is tell the House what sort of institution we should have in St. Patrick's, what the ideal would be. First of all, it is important that it should be in open surroundings with plenty of open ground around it, plenty of playing fields and plenty of facilities for open air recreation. Secondly, it is important that it should be in or near Dublin for a variety of reasons. First of all, as has been pointed out, the majority of boys in St. Patrick's come from Dublin. Therefore, from the point of view of visits by their parents, relatives and friends, it is important that the institution should be fairly readily accessible, at least to Dublin city. Indeed, that would facilitate most of the people throughout the country as well because our transport system is such that Dublin is fairly conveniently accessible from any part.

It is also important that it should be in or near Dublin from the point of view of rehabilitation. One of the most important points in this regard is the ability to procure suitable employment for the boys when they are discharged. This point was well brought out in a film on St. Patrick's which was shown on Telefís Éireann and which was produced by Radharc Productions. Siting in or near Dublin is also very important from two other points of view. First of all, if we are to go in more and more for the system of allowing boys out on parole when they are serving their sentences, to look for employment, it is important that they should be near Dublin. In addition, if we are to go ahead to any extent with this scheme of letting boys who are serving sentences go out during the day to work, in appropriate cases, and return to prison at night, then again, proximity to Dublin is desirable from the point of view of any such scheme. As I say, on the whole the advantages are in favour of its being situated in or near Dublin, provided we can procure somewhere with plenty of open spaces.

With regard to the building itself, one immediately thinks of a number of desirable requirements. We must allow for the maximum possible degree of segregation. This is important in any prison but it is vitally important in an institution for young people. Secondly, we must, if at all possible, provide for the incorporation of a matron in the prison service. Where you have juveniles confined in an institution of this sort, it is very important from a number of points of view to have a matron system of some sort in operation. The type of building, therefore, will be determined by a number of requirements of this sort. We have been closely examining the matter for some considerable time and we have invoked the aid of the Office of Public Works in our search. We have considered all sorts of existing buildings and institutions to see whether they could be adapted for our purpose. One by one, we have regretfully had to rule them out.

Some considerable time ago we initiated the examination of the proposition of transferring St. Patrick's to Portlaoise—that is, closing Portlaoise as an adult prison, transferring St. Patrick's there, and making it a juvenile prison. While that examination has not been completed, it is my own personal view at this point of the examination that it is unlikely that Portlaoise would prove suitable from a number of points of view, including some of those I have mentioned.

I see Deputy Treacy in the House. I am not forgetting the fact that he never misses an opportunity to press the claims of Clonmel in this regard. This problem is very much on our minds. As of now, it is one to which we can see no ready solution. I believe we shall have to build eventually and my personal opinion is that we shall have to try to get a suitable site on the outskirts of Dublin.

Mr. Treacy

Am I to take it the Minister has ruled out the possibility of a return to Clonmel, the original home of St. Patrick's?

Mr. Haughey

Almost certainly, yes. I mentioned a number of reasons which indicate fairly clearly that it is desirable that the new institution should be in or near Dublin. However, if the town of Clonmel were to offer us a new institution, built from the ground up to our requirements, then we would have to consider that.

Mr. Treacy

That is quite a tall order.

Mr. Haughey

Some Deputies are confused, I think, about the relationship between St. Patrick's and what is commonly called Marlboro House. The replacement of Marlboro House is now under way. The new institution will be in Finglas. There will be accommodation for between 80 and 90 boys. It will be under the control of the De la Salle Order. There will be an educational psychologist attached to the institution. The new institution will, of course, like Marlboro House, be under the control of the Department of Education.

Deputy Dillon asked whether we are considering the setting up of open prisons. We have certainly looked into the matter and examined it. The idea of an open prison is in many ways very attractive but, as of now, I think most sociologists and most people interested in penal reform would agree that the case for the open prison has not yet been established. In our own way we are working towards the idea of an open prison, in so far as we now have several cases in which we grant prisoners parole to go out during the day to work, returning to the prison each evening. That has innumerable advantages. It helps to rehabilitate the prisoner, give him back his self-respect and soften the process of his return to the outside world. It enables him to earn money to keep his family while he is in prison, if he has such a responsibility. It also enables him, when he finally leaves the prison, to continue in employment.

It is very valuable. It is a scheme from which we expect great results. We are getting very good results from it at the moment. To that extent we are operating an open prison, but we are not at all convinced that a fullscale open prison on the lines of those in Britain and elsewhere should be adopted here. In all these matters we are keeping our minds open, watching developments and studying reports from Britain and international organisations. We have certainly not ruled out the open prison as something we will never contemplate; as I have said, we are progressing towards the idea.

Many Deputies have mentioned traffic wardens and indicated a preference for traffic wardens as distinct from ordinary members of the Garda Síochána engaging in these duties. I am not sure whether such a scheme would finally commend itself to me. If we were to implement such a scheme, we would have to provide for it in legislation and we are at the moment examining the possibilities of making provision for it in a piece of legislation which the Minister for Local Government has on the stocks. When people talk about a special traffic corps or traffic wardens, they are, I think, thinking in terms of a scheme of fines-on-the-spot being administered by this type of official. We have not really decided whether or not such a corps would be advantageous or feasible, but we are examining the question of making provision for such a corps in the legislation I have mentioned.

Deputy Dillon made a very good point and I agree with him fully when he says he does not regard harsher sentences by justices and judges as the complete answer to our crime problems. He made the point, very validly, that a high detection rate is very important in this respect. That is quite true. The greatest possible deterrent to criminal activity is a high detection rate. We have a high detection rate here as compared with other countries and, in that regard, we have some grounds for satisfaction. It is not, however, correct to emphasise one factor as against the other. Both are important. A sensible attitude by our courts to crime and criminals is of vital importance. There is ground, I think, for criticism from time to time that our courts are too lenient in this regard. These opinions have been expressed from time to time by members of the public, public bodies and so on.

Deputies will be glad to know that the district justices have agreed to consider at their next statutory meeting the question of the avoidance of undue divergences in the penalties imposed. Most Deputies will agree that this is very desirable indeed. We would all like to see penalties roughly in correspondence. I must immediately qualify that by saying that only the presiding judge or justice is in a position to judge the case fully. Only he has the full knowledge of all the circumstances. He can never deal with cases coming before him by any rule of thumb method. While having regard to that, and to the necessity for a judge to deal with each case coming before him as he sees it, I still believe there is room for greater uniformity of penalties. I hope the forthcoming statutory meeting of the justices will do good work in that regard.

Deputies mentioned the question of itinerants. Again, I want to claim that this Government have done something positive in regard to this long-standing social evil. The Government established a Commission to examine the problem and make recommendations. That Commission, which did an excellent job, has submitted a very fine report. That report is at present under examination in the various Government Departments, and the Minister for Local Government has the function of co-ordinating that examination. In due course we will have a decision by the Government on the various matters dealt with in it. This Government—maybe not more than any other Government before them, but certainly as much as any Government before them—recognise there is a problem here, that it is, if you like, a blot on our national escutcheon. We have these people in our midst who are definitely not getting a fair crack of the whip or a place in the sun. This Government recognise we have an obligation to do something about it, and we intend to do something about it.

Deputy Dillon mentioned the question of courtesy in the Garda Síochána. I fully agree with him—both from the point of view of our own people and of tourists—it is desirable that in all their dealings with the public the Gardaí should be as courteous as possible. I think the situation in that regard is very satisfactory indeed. From time to time I receive very pleasant and encouraging reports from different parts of the country about the helpful and courteous ways in which members of the Force deal with the general public. In a Force of 6,000 it is inevitable that we should have an odd incident of discourtesy here and there; but on the whole the picture is a satisfactory one. The Garda carry out their duties in as helpful and as courteous a fashion as possible.

Deputy M. J. O'Higgins raised two matters with which I want to deal specifically. He mentioned, first, two cases in which two judges—one in the Circuit Court and the other in the High Court—had occasion to comment from the bench on my action in regard to petitions I received. I am happy to know from what Deputy O'Higgins said that he is solidly behind me in my insistence that, as Minister for Justice, I have the right and the duty to consider any petition which comes before me. Deputy O'Higgins made it clear that he does not question that for one moment, and indeed I know the overwhelming majority of Deputies will agree that it is necessary for the proper administration of justice that this petition procedure be continued and that the Minister for Justice should have in exceptional cases the right to exercise the prerogative of mercy handed down to him.

In both the cases concerned—I do not want to be raking up old sores or stirring up old controversies—what was at issue was my right, as Minister, to defer the execution of warrants, pending my decision on petitions received. This was the only issue on which both judges, in my opinion wrongly, commented. As I said before in the House, I propose to continue to exercise this power. Until this House decides otherwise, I am not going to be stampeded out of my rights in appropriate cases to instruct the Gardaí to defer execution of the warrant until such time as I have an opportunity of considering a petition coming before me. If I am not to have this power, then the whole petition procedure is, to all intents and purposes, useless.

Very often the proper consideration of a petition involves a very great deal of time. Sometimes it takes up to a month to get all the reports and the views of all the persons concerned. That month could be in many cases crucial. It would, in effect, be negativing the whole petition procedure if I were to agree to opinions which suggest I should not have the right to defer the execution of warrants in appropriate cases where I receive petitions. In both of the cases mentioned, as a matter of fact, I rejected the petitions. I decided not to accede to the petitions, and that the decision of the court should stand. All that was involved, as I say, was whether or not I had the right, exercised by all my predecessors, to withhold or defer execution of warrants until I had an opportunity of considering the petitions before me.

Deputy O'Higgins also mentioned the case of Mrs. Costello. I want honestly and seriously to suggest to him that he is making a mountain out of a molehill. This was a trivial and unimportant matter. Indeed, to suggest there was any question of the Government using the big stick, of threatening people or of forbidding people to exercise their proper democratic rights is just a little absurd. All that happened was this. A report—as it transpired, an irresponsible report— appeared in some of the newspapers to the effect that Mrs. Costello was about to embark on an illegal course of action. The Gardaí, very rightly and as they do frequently from time to time —and indeed many Deputies here this evening have spoken on the very fact that the Gardaí had a primary obligation to prevent crime if they possibly can rather than have it happen and then detect it — went along to Mrs. Costello on the basis of this report. They interviewed her politely and courteously and informed her that if this report were true and if she were to embark on this course of action she would render herself liable to prosecution for a criminal offence. The good lady had no hesitation whatever, having thanked the Gardaí for their services in coming to her, in assuring them she had no intention whatever of pursuing the course which had been suggested, that she had plenty of means at her disposal for conveying her views to members of the Government if she wished to do so and that she intended to avail of these means. That was the end of the incident.

Deputy Tully returned to his charge that the citizens of the North of Ireland are very lax about their observations of our speed limits. I have no evidence that this is so but as Deputy Tully assures me from personal observation that he believes it to be, all I can do is to take note of what he says and direct the attention of the Garda authorities to the stretch of roadway in question, the main Dublin-Belfast road. I am sure the Gardaí already are devoting as much attention to the enforcement of the speed limits along this road as they possibly can but to satisfy Deputy Tully I promise him I shall have a word with them about it and see if anything can be done to improve the situation.

I hope I have dealt as fully as Deputies would like with most of the matters that were raised. If I overlooked any particular point it was through inadvertence and not through any desire to do so. I hope the explanations I have given commend themselves to the various Deputies concerned.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

Did the Minister say anything about Portlaoise?

Mr. Haughey

I did earlier on in answering Deputy Dillon. At the moment the intention is that Portlaoise Prison should remain as it is. We did some time ago initiate an examination as to whether it would be possible to transfer St. Patrick's to Portlaoise and transfer the long-term prisoners out of Portlaoise to somewhere else. That examination is not concluded but for the moment it is unlikely, for a variety of reasons, that we would make any change.

Question "That the Vote be referred back for reconsideration" put and declared lost.

Vote put and agreed to.