I move:
That a sum not exceeding £266,010 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st March, 1967, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Minister for Justice and of certain other services administered by that Office, including certain Grants-in-Aid; and of the Public Record Office and of the Keeper of State Papers and for the purchase of historical documents, etc.
With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I propose, as in previous years, to treat the six Votes, for which the Minister for Justice is responsible, including the Supplementary Estimate for the Garda Síochána, as one group so that there may be one general discussion, without, of course, prejudicing the right of any Deputy to raise a particular point on any individual Vote.
The total Estimate for all the Votes for which I am responsible is £10,668,220. To this falls to be added £900,000, being the amount of the Supplementary Estimate for the Garda Síochána. The total provision for last year, including £57,080 transferred from the Votes for Increases in Pensions and Remuneration, was £10,418,120. The proposed total provision for this year is, therefore, higher by £1,150,100 than the total amount provided last year. This increase is principally due to salary increases for the Garda Síochána determined by the conciliation and arbitration machinery, and to increases in the rates of travelling and subsistence allowances, increased provision for Garda pensions, an increase in the cost of goods and services and the provision for a modest increase in staff, mainly in the Land Registry and in the Courts. The Garda Síochána salary increases account for £900,000, as set out in the Supplementary Estimate.
The Vote for the Office of the Minister for Justice caters for the staff and services of the Department's Headquarters, and shows an increase of £24,200. This increase is due principally to salary increases determined by the conciliation and arbitration machinery, a net increase of three subordinate posts and to normal incremental progression.
During the year under review, substantial progress has been made in my Department's law reform activities.
Following lengthy discussion in the House and in the Seanad, the Succession Bill, 1965, was finally enacted in December last. The Act represents, perhaps, one of the most important pieces of legal reform so far undertaken in the State. Section 2 of the Act provides that the Act shall come into operation on such day, not earlier than the 1st July, 1966, as the Minister for Justice appoints by order. On the 20th July, 1966, I made two orders the effect of which will be to bring the Succession Act and the Registration of Title Act, 1964, into operation on the 1st January, 1967.
As the new law of succession will have an important bearing on the operation of the machinery of registration of title, it is essential that the two Acts should come into operation on the same date. Before deciding on the commencement date, I had, of course, to ensure that the Land Registry would be adequately geared to cope with the additional work that will be involved. I had also to make arrangements for the establishment of new district probate registries so as to have a local service available throughout the country for those wishing to take out grants of representation in respect of the estates of deceased persons. As already announced, I have decided to establish eight new district registries which will be located in Clonmel, Donegal, Dundalk, Galway, Mullingar, Sligo, Tralee and Wexford. At present there are six district registries, in Castlebar, Cavan, Cork, Kilkenny, Limerick and Waterford. As from the 1st January next, there will thus be 14 district registries in operation.
Orders under section 24 of the Registration of Title Act, 1964, extending compulsory registration to urban areas will be made from time to time until the entire country is covered—in, I should imagine, ten to 15 years time. I propose to allow the Act to operate for a short while before making any of these orders, as this will enable the Land Registry to gain experience of, and adjust itself to, the changes made by the Act in the registration of title system.
Between them, the 1964 Act and the 1965 Act codify, simplify and modernise to a considerable extent the law of property in this country. I hope to follow them up in due course with legislation to deal with the Registry of Deeds and with the law of trusts. The Registry of Deeds will, of course, eventually disappear but there is need in the meantime to bring the procedure in the registration of deeds up to date so that we will no longer have to rely on a statute of Queen Anne. Trusts are an inherent part of our system of property law and a number of reforms require to be made.
The Committee on Court Practice and Procedure have submitted six Interim Reports to me within the past eighteen months or so. Three of these Reports deal with various aspects of the jury system, one deals with the question of increasing the jurisdiction of the Circuit and District Courts and the other two deal with proposals for the reorganisation of the courts structure on the criminal side. The three Reports dealing with juries have already been published and I have made arrangements to publish the others as soon as possible. As soon as the views of interested parties and of the public generally have been obtained on the recommendations made in these Reports, I shall introduce legislative proposals to deal with the various matters at issue.
During the year the Criminal Justice Bill, 1965, was introduced and passed its Second Stage. The object of this Bill, as Deputies will be aware, is to establish a new procedure for the preliminary examination of indictable offences. I expect it to result in the virtual abolition of the existing deposition procedure, with all the delays and expense it involves not only for the prosecution but for the accused, and its replacement by a system which will retain the safeguards which the present procedure provides for the accused that a trial will not be unnecessarily embarked upon.
I was extremely gratified by the constructive attitude shown by Deputies during the Second Reading and by the large number of useful suggestions which they made in the course of that debate. Many more suggestions have been received in the meantime from members of the judiciary and other interested bodies. As a result I have tabled a number of amendments for Committee Stage which will, I think, improve the efficiency of the new procedure.
The Landlord and Tenant (Ground Rents) Bill, 1965, was also circulated and has passed all stages in this House. The Bill will enable certain leaseholders and yearly tenants to acquire the freehold of their premises.
In January of this year, I established the Landlord and Tenant Commission whose work, I envisage, will be complementary to that of the former Ground Rents Commission. As their first and most urgent task I have asked them to report on the grant of tenancies under Part III of the Landlord and Tenant Act, 1931. This is a part of the law which has special importance for many business tenants whose leases are due for renewal and it has given rise to some difficulties in recent years in connection with certain property transactions.
When they have completed this task I have asked them to examine whether there should be an extension of the categories of lessees who are entitled under the present law to a reversionary lease and, therefore, as the Ground Rents Bill proposes, to purchase the freehold of their property. The Commission will then go on to review the operation of the whole landlord and tenant code which goes back to Deasy's Act of 1860.
In April, 1965, a summary of the Report of the Interdepartmental Committee on Malicious Injuries to the Person and Property was published. For years now there has been an agitation for a change in the law affecting the payment from the rates of compensation for malicious injuries to property. The whole subject is now under active review with the object of putting definite proposals to the Government for amending the law on malicious injuries.
Proposals for the reciprocal enforcement of judgments and maintenance orders as between ourselves and Northern Ireland and Britain, to which I referred last year, have now reached the stage when I expect that discussions at official level can be commenced shortly. The broader question of preparing legislation to enable all foreign judgments to be enforced here, on a reciprocal basis, is also being given attention.
The Adoption Board continues to handle a steady stream of applications for adoption orders. One thousand and forty-nine orders were made in 1965, 46 more than in 1964: 557 of the orders were in respect of boys and 492 in respect of girls. At the end of 1965 there were 23 adoption societies registered by the Board and 77 per cent of the children in respect of whom adoption orders were made during the year were placed by adoption societies.
In order to facilitate adopters, the Board are holding more meetings out of Dublin. In 1965, 27 out of a total of 77 meetings of the Board were held outside Dublin. Meetings were held in Cork, Limerick, Galway, Sligo, Kilkenny, Wexford, Waterford, Letter-kenny and Killarney. I cannot praise too highly this splendid social service.
During the year 1965, 3,468 registered aliens were in residence here for periods of three months or more. The corresponding figure for 1964 was 3,384 and, in fact, there has been no significant change in our registered alien population for many years. For clarification, perhaps I should mention here that British subjects are in general, exempt from the restrictions applying to aliens. It is estimated that, apart from those aliens who came here via Britain and Northern Ireland, nearly 83,000 aliens came to this country direct from the continents of Europe and America, as compared with 68,000 in 1964. Of course, the very great majority of aliens arriving here are visitors for a week or two and as their stay does not exceed three months they are not classifiable as registered aliens under the Aliens Act.
Eighty-three persons were granted certificates of naturalisation as Irish citizens in 1965. In all, just over 2,500 persons—roughly one-fifth being under 21 years of age—have been naturalised since 1935, when provision was first made in our law for the grant of certificates of naturalisation: 28 per cent of these were British, 16 per cent German, seven per cent Italian, with lesser percentages otherwise. Aliens of 46 nationalities have been granted Irish citizenship. The Film Censor examined 996 films in 1965. 874 films were passed and 78 were passed with cuts. Forty-four films were rejected. The total footage examined was just under 2,870,000, a drop of about 360,000 feet on the previous year.
The Censorship of Films Appeal Board viewed 69 films on appeal in 1965, six being appeals against cuts. Twenty-three of the films were rejected, one was passed with cuts and 36 were passed for limited viewing, 29 of them with cuts. Three films were still under consideration at the end of the year. In the six cases of appeals against cuts, the cuts were restored in full in three cases and in part in the other three.
Deputies may wonder how the Appeal Board came to view 63 rejected films when the Official Censor rejected only 44. There has been some speculation on this elsewhere. The explanation is, in fact, simple: there is no time limit on appeals and there is, invariably, a number of appeals from rejections in previous years.
The Censorship of Publications Board examined 517 books and 11 periodicals in 1965. Of these, 11 books were examined as a result of formal complaints, 505 were examined on reference from the customs authorities and one on the Board's own initiative. The Board made 296 prohibition orders in respect of books and nine in respect of periodicals. Five of the books had been the subject of prohibition orders in earlier years but, for technical reasons, it was necessary to make repeat orders in respect of them. There were ten appeals in respect of books, one of which was allowed, and two appeals in respect of periodicals, neither of which was allowed.
The usual transfers of testamentary documents from the principal and district probate registries and from the courts have been received and the documents have been arranged.
Presentations from solicitors and others have added about 400 testamentary and 33 other documents.
I mentioned last year that the Irish Manuscripts Commission had undertaken the preparation for publication of the Calendar to the Council Book of 1581-86 and the list of political prisoners forming the first section of the Kilmainham Jail register of 1789-1814. Work on these projects is now in progress and I have authorised the extension of the list of Kilmainham Jail political prisoners up to the year 1910 the date at which the Jail register ceases.
I mentioned also last year that the Irish Manuscripts Commission had undertaken the publication of the Calendar to Departmental Correspondence, 1683-1740. This work is not now being proceeded with and a report on it in the Commission's publication Analecta Hibernica is being substituted. The Commission has also undertaken the publication of the surviving copies of two 16th century surveys of portions of Munster, known as the Desmond Survey and Peyton's Survey, the originals of which perished in the destruction of the office in 1922, and the Record Commissioners' calendars of inquisitions. The inquisitions, which perished in 1922, were of 16th and 17th century date, and consisted of the reports of sworn inquiries, mainly into the tenure of land, made on the deaths of persons holding from the crown. Summaries of them had been made by the Record Commission of 1810-1830. It is expected that the entire series will form 11 volumes, which will be published by degrees. A volume for Country Dublin and one for Wexford, Wicklow, Kilkenny and Carlow have been put in hand; the former will be edited by the Deputy Keeper.
More up-to-date copying equipment, to serve the Public Record Office and the Land Registry, is being installed currently. It will provide both micro film and full size copies more expeditiously and is intended to meet a long felt want in the facilities hitherto available.
Discussions have been held by the Deputy Keeper with the Deputy Keeper of the Records for Northern Ireland, and arrangements have been worked out for the exchange of particulars or copies of material coming into the hands of either institution which are of historical interest to the other.
I now pass on to the Garda Síochána Vote, No. 22. This Vote shows an increase of £153,300 on the provision in the previous year's Estimate. To this must be added £900,000, which is the amount of the Supplementary Estimate to provide for Garda pay increases which were determined recently in accordance with the provisions of the Garda Conciliation and Arbitration Scheme.
Pensions and gratuities—Subhead G —are mainly responsible for the increase of £153,300. This subhead alone accounts for over £134,000 of the increase. The rising cost of pensions has been a feature of the Estimates for a number of years and it is due, of course, to the abnormally high number of retirements from the Force on grounds of age which has been going on for some time and is likely to continue for a couple more years. The increase in pensions granted from August of last year has also added to the cost.
There is an increase of about £11,000 in Subhead B—travelling and incidental expenses. This has resulted from increases granted in subsistence and other allowances following agreed recommendations by the Garda Síochána Conciliation Council under the Conciliation and Arbitration Scheme.
The cost of Post Office services shows a considerable increase—nearly £52,000 on last year's provision. This has resulted from higher charges for telephone rentals and calls and for postal services. The cost of these was under-estimated last year.
The clothing subhead—Subhead D —shows an increase of over £21,000. This has resulted mainly from increases in prices. Part of it is also due to an increased provision for clothing and equipment for motor-cyclists, which is needed because there has been an increase in the number of motor-cycles. This is also reflected in the transport subhead—Subhead F—which shows an increase of £30,000. Also, the number of cars that will fall to be replaced during the year is greater than the number for which provision was made last year.
Without taking the Supplementary Estimate into account, there would be a decrease of £15,000 in the provision for pay. This is due to the fact that it was necessary, last year, to provide for payment of 53 weeks pay to weekly-paid men, that is, about one-third of the Force, as against the normal 52-week year. The reduction that would have resulted from this has been offset to some extent by an increase of 16 in Garda strength, which now stands at 6,460. The pay increases, which have been provided for in the Supplementary Estimate, have, however, resulted in an increase of £885,000 over the pay provision last year.
The provision for Appropriations in Aid shows an increase of over £71,000. This is due entirely to increased receipts that are expected from the Road Fund in respect of Garda Síochána expenses in connection with the enforcement of the Road Traffic Acts.
Work on the provision of new stations and Garda houses, and on the improvement of existing premises continued during the year. Six new stations and seven married quarters have been provided by the Office of Public Works and 134 houses were provided by the National Building Agency. At present, work is in progress on 12 new stations and 68 houses and married quarters.
The opening in July of last year of the indoor swimming pool at the Training Centre in Templemore marked the completion of the scheme to provide the recruits at this centre with up-to-date life saving facilities. Unfortunately, progress in teaching swimming and life saving skills to recruits was delayed by the discovery of a serious leak in the swimming pool. This was a matter of great disappointment and dissatisfaction but it was outside of official control. The repair work has been completed and the pool has now been in regular use for some months.
Apart from the leak in the swimming pool, a number of minor defects, principally in plaster work, were discovered in the Templemore premises during the year. These have been put right without cost to the State and it is unnecessary to comment further on them.
I am giving constant attention to providing the Garda Síochána with the most up-to-date equipment possible to enable them to carry out efficiently their various duties. As Deputies will be aware, a mobile detection unit was acquired some time ago, and this will make a valuable contribution to the efficiency of the Force. This is a van that is equipped with radio, telephone, searchlights, loudspeakers and miscellaneous technical equipment. It makes possible on-the-spot taking and checking of fingerprints and photography, mapping and the investigation of criminal clues of various kinds. In criminal investigations, speed is paramount, and the new unit will cut out a good deal of travel by Gardaí between the scene of a serious crime and the Garda station. The unit is in every sense a mobile Garda station—and a very well equipped one at that. In addition to the technical equipment I have mentioned, it also has sleeping and cooking facilities. The unit has already been brought into use in connection with a murder case and it has proved a great help to the Gardaí engaged on the investigations.
I have already mentioned, in connection with increases in the provisions under a couple of subheads, additional motor-cycles. Sixty additional cycles have been provided and these are now in regular use, mainly for the control of traffic. They have been allocated to stations around Dublin and also to stations throughout the country that are situated on main traffic routes. They have improved Garda mobility considerably and make for more effective control of traffic. They are also, of course, of considerable assistance to the Garda in carrying out other duties.
The extent to which Garda mobility has been increased can be seen clearly by comparing the present position with that of ten years ago. In 1956 there were 169 cars and only 19 motor-cycles in the Garda fleet. Now there are 261 cars and 219 motor-cycles. As a further aid, 25 motor-cycles in and around Dublin are fitted with radios and it is proposed to extend, in time, the use of radios on motor-cycles to all centres where there is a Garda radio service.
Garda radio services have been provided in Portlaoise, Mullingar, Ballinasloe, Athlone, Thurles and Fermoy during the past year and it is proposed to continue the extension of this service in coming years. The service now provides partial coverage in 14 Garda Divisions. Ten years ago it covered only Dublin city. I referred last year to tests that were being carried out on the use of light two-way radio sets on the beat in Dublin. Preliminary investigations indicated that the use of these sets would be of great help to the man on the beat. Accordingly, 12 of them were purchased and put into use in various districts in Dublin. We are now satisfied that this type of equipment can make a signal contribution to the efficient and economical use of manpower and arrangements are being made in conjunction with the Engineering Branch of the Post Office for a considerable amplification of the two-way radio control system. The communications centre in Dublin Castle is fully loaded for two-way radio traffic at present and a general use of walkie-talkies by men on night duty necessitates the installation of fairly costly apparatus at selected city stations.
There was a fall of just under 1,000 in the number in indictable crimes in the year ended 30th September, 1965, as compared with the previous year. The number of such crimes occurring in the Dublin Metropolitan Police area fell by more than 1,000, being offset by a very slight rise in the number in the rest of the country. The total number of indictable crimes in the year ended 30th September, 1965, was 16,736 as against 17,700 in 1964 and 16,203 in 1963. Larcenies showed the biggest decrease—from 11,972 in 1964 to 11,014 in 1965, and housebreaking and similar offences fell from 4,282 in 1964 to 4,213 in 1965. While more than 9,000 of these indictable offences were committed in the Dublin Metropolitan Police Area, which embraces Dublin City, most of County Dublin and small portions of some of the adjoining counties, this figure, as I have said, is 1,000-odd below the figure for 1964. I am particularly pleased that there has been a significant increase in the detection rate. The rate for 1964 was 64 per cent while for 1965 it was 70 per cent for the whole country, which is extremely good. I regret, however, that the number of crimes against the person committed last year shows a slight increase over the 1964 figure. The increase is from 1,045 to 1,113 and the 1965 figure for this particular type of offence is the highest on record.
Although the review relates to the year 1965-1966 I think that, having mentioned a fall in the indictable crime figures for that period, I should mention also that in the year just passed there has been an upward trend. I want to assure the House that in matters of this kind my Department and the Garda authorities have no complacency and every effort is being made to deal with the situation.
While I am speaking of crime, perhaps I may reassure the House that the Bill to deal with the control of flick-knives, daggers and other offensive weapons is being prepared with all possible speed. This is not the time for me to go into the merits of the case for the Bill, but I would like to say a brief word to explain why the Bill is not yet ready. The reason is that I am proposing to include in the Bill many other matters besides the control of offensive weapons. For instance, the Bill will simplify the criminal law by abolishing the distinctions between felonies and misdemeanours. It will also formally abolish penal servitude, hard labour and other concepts that have ceased to have any practical meaning. These provisions call for an extensive list of changes in various enactments going back many years.
It is probably a truism to say that, for most potential offenders, the greatest deterrent is the fear of being caught and, side by side with the reform of the criminal law by the abolition of felony, with its associated forfeitures and disqualifications, the Bill will have various provisions designed to strengthen the powers of the Garda Síochána in the prevention and detection of crime. At the present time the Garda can in certain cases get a warrant from a District Justice to search premises, but there are many cases, even where a very serious crime has been committed, where the law does not provide for the issue of a warrant. Again, fingerprints may be taken in certain cases at present, but not in other cases. The Bill will deal with all these matters, without, of course, losing sight of the need to protect the legitimate rights of the individual. Much work has already been done on the Bill and I am pressing forward with its preparation, with a view to its introduction at the earliest possible moment.
The total number of persons prosecuted for summary offences rose from 120,715 in the year ended 30th September, 1964, to 139,856 in 1965, the biggest increase being in road traffic offences, for which over 113,000 persons were prosecuted as compared with less than 95,000 in the previous year and under 75,000 in 1963. In addition, over 51,000 fines-on-the-spot notices were issued for contraventions of parking bye-laws and similar offences and in only about 8,000 of these cases was it necessary to prosecute. These figures taken together indicate the growing importance of road traffic in our lives and the increasing amount of time and attention the Garda are devoting to it. In this connection I might mention that an inter-departmental committee consisting of officers of my Department, the Department of Local Government and the Garda has been set up to keep under constant review the many problems relating to the enforcement of the road traffic law. Incidentally, the fines-on-the-spot system was extended to Cork, Limerick and Galway on 1st May, 1965, and the Garda say that it is proving very effective in those cities.
Before I leave the subject of crime, I feel that I must refer to the undue sensationalism and exaggeration in some newspaper reports of crime. Quite often, there is an anti-police bias in those reports and one can sympathise with the Garda when they feel resentment. But my main concern is not with the fact that the police may feel badly about such matters but, rather, with the effect on public confidence and on the attitude of the man-in-the-street to the police which a consistent diet of distorted reports about crime and the police inevitably produces. The effect of these reports is to suggest that crime is rife and the police are unable to protect the citizens. If detections were given equal prominence with the reports of crimes committed, things would not be so bad; but frequently, where the crime has made front-page, headline news, one has to search very closely for the subsequent report that the perpetrator of the crime has been caught. And it is not unknown for newspapers in reporting a crime to forget to mention that the criminal has been caught, even though that fact is known to them at the time. I have no wish to stop newspapers from reporting crimes; on the contrary, I know that they can do much to help the police by their reports, but I would appeal to them to avoid sensationalism and to report the facts.
I think that it would be right for me to mention here, too, that on occasions during the year I have received a number of complaints, some of which have also been aired publicly, which criticised the manner in which individual gardaí behaved towards members of the public in the course of their investigations. I do not accept all that was said but I have felt it necessary to draw the attention of the Commissioner to the fact that occasionally members of the Force behave with a disregard of feeling which is entirely contrary to their traditions and general behaviour. I am glad to say that the number of complaints which have been substantiated are few and far between.
The Extradition Act, 1965, came into operation on 16th August, 1965. Part III of the Act deals with the extradition to England and Wales, Scotland, the Isle of Man, the Channel Islands and Northern Ireland of persons accused or convicted under the laws of those places of indictable offences or summary offences punishable by imprisonment for a maximum period of at least six months. Up to the middle of September of this year, 107 warrants had been received for execution here, of which 18 were warrants issued in Northern Ireland. Sixty-seven of those warrants were executed, including ten from Northern Ireland.
The British Backing of Warrants (Republic of Ireland) Act, 1965 came into operation on 15th November, 1965. The Act provides for the execution in Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man of warrants issued here for persons accused or convicted under our law of indictable offences or summary offences punishable by imprisonment for a maximum period of at least six months. Up to the middle of September, 121 warrants had been sent for execution, including 16 sent to Northern Ireland. Eighty-six of those warrants were executed, 12 of them in Northern Ireland.
I now come to the Vote for Prisons which is for a sum of £418,450. Additional expenditure on some of the provisions in the Vote gives a gross increase of £22,000 over the Vote for 1965-66 but savings on other items reduce the net increase to £15,500. The main increase is in Subhead A where provision has had to be made for 53 weeks pay for weekly paid staff as against the 52 weeks in 1965-66.
The Estimate has been framed on the basis of an expected daily average of 570 persons in custody during the year in the prisons and in St. Patrick's Institution for youthful offenders. The daily average for the year 1965 was less than this—561 in fact—but the figure has been climbing gradually over recent years and a lower estimate than 570 cannot safely be anticipated. Indeed, while the daily average population for 1965, at 561, was 12 less than in 1964, the actual overall intake of persons, either under sentence or in custody on remand or while awaiting trial, was much higher, the figures being 3,649 for 1965 as against 3,385 for 1964. The intake figure also shows a higher conviction rate, the number of persons received under sentence of imprisonment or detention in 1965 being 2,477 as against 2,348 in 1964 an increase of 129. This upward movement was related solely to the adult prisoner population and most of the cases, about 80 per cent, concerned persons sentenced for debt, contempt of court or failure to pay fines.
There was a drop, compared to the previous year, in the number of sentences in the 16 to 21 age group. The prison figure of receptions under sentence in 1964 totalled 1,791 and included 183 persons under 21 years of age: persons getting prison sentences in 1965 totalled 1,925 and of these the number of young offenders was 170. In St. Patrick's Institution where the daily average in 1965 was 164 or two less than 1964, the number of young offenders committed directly to the Institution in 1965 was 552—five less than the previous year. Even though the fall in numbers of juvenile committals is not a significant one, I am taking it as a hopeful sign that the several steps taken in recent years to deal with juvenile delinquency—the establishment of the junior police liaison scheme, the expanded probation system, etc., are beginning to have effect.
In the field of penal reform, the chief developments of the past year have been (1) the success of the hostel established in Mountjoy Prison for prisoners under corrective training who are being prepared for their final release, (2) the establishment of an after-care committee to strengthen and continue the work of prison rehabilitation and, (3) on the probation side, the initiation of a scheme for providing a network of voluntary probation workers throughout the country.
I mentioned last year the opening of Mountjoy Prison hostel and I am glad to be able to report that the innovation has been fully justified by the progress made to date. Since it was opened in July, 1964, nearly 100 prisoners have passed through the hostel and only five of these have been recommitted to prison. It would be too much, I suppose, to expect a continued "success" rate of the order of 95 per cent but we have every reason to think that a very high proportion of these trainees will not come before the criminal courts again. The enthusiasm and dedication to this rehabilitation work by the prisons staff does credit to all concerned. May I, once again, invite Deputies to come and see for themselves the radical changes in prison administration that have been taking place in recent years.
Full membership of the hostel is the final stage in the programme of prison corrective training where a prisoner has graduated through all preceding stages, has been placed in ordinary outside employment and is released from prison each day to go to work. The earnings of hostel prisoners now amount to some thousands of pounds a year from which they may contribute to the upkeep of their families while they are yet undergoing imprisonment and put by savings against the time of final release. At the moment there are five prisoners living in prison and working outside during the day. In St. Patrick's Institution daily working release was granted during 1965 to 30 inmates to take up employment secured for them by the Institution's Welfare Officer. In 1966 to date a further 26 inmates have been similarly released to day-time employment. At present there are four youths on daily working release.
Apart from its use for the purpose of allowing persons in custody to go out to employment daily, the powers in the Criminal Justice Act, 1960 to grant temporary release were exercised during 1965 in 57 other cases, 22 of which related to home leave for Christmas. In the remaining cases there were a variety of reasons—family illnesses and deaths, domestic and business problems, employment interviews, etc. In only one of all the cases where temporary release was granted did the person concerned fail to abide by his undertaking to return to prison.
In almost every case where employment has been obtained for the prisoners it has been procured by the prison welfare service and the welfare service is also charged with the duty of advising and guiding prisoners after their final release. But towards the end of last year I decided to set up an after-care committee, comprised of a number of businessmen who might be in a position to open the doors to employment for deserving prisoners. I am hopeful that the application of business expertise to the problems of prison industries and training should have very useful results. The enthusiasm which the members of the committee have been showing is gratifying.
I cannot emphasise too strongly that a prison rehabilitation programme operates under severe limitations, among which I may mention individual character and aptitudes, the length of a prison sentence and so on. As to individual character—nobody can help a man who is not willing to be helped. Even in the case of those who desire to make a new life the prison authorities must work within the period of imprisonment and, strangely enough, a prisoner who is in for only a short term for a minor offence is least likely to benefit: instruction and training must be carried on over a fairly long period. Nevertheless, our prison staffs have done highly commendable work. A total of 737 prisoners have now been discharged from the corrective training unit since the unit was established in October, 1962. Of this number 112 have been recommitted to prison. This means that, to date, roughly 80 per cent of corrective trainees have been doing well. It is, perhaps, too soon to make conclusive claims but all the indications are that the scheme is proving a very good success. We are keeping abreast of penal reform methods elsewhere and last year two senior officers of my Department attended the United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders which was held in Stockholm.
Another area in which the work of penal reform has been making progress is in the preventive service given by the Garda juvenile liaison officers who were appointed in Dublin city in August, 1963. The success of the scheme in Dublin encouraged me to extend the scheme to the cities of Cork, Limerick and Waterford. A total of over 1,732 juveniles had been dealt with under the scheme up to last April and of these about nine per cent only have since become involved in further offences. I think we can regard this result as very satisfactory. I should also like to remind the House of the work of the Garda in promoting and supporting the boys' club movement; individual Gardaí are taking an active part in the management and running of well over half the boys' clubs in the country of which there are now over 350. In Dublin alone there are over 10,000 boys and girls enrolled in parish clubs.
A new development of the probation system also deserves mention. When the Probation Service was examined by the inter-departmental committee set up in 1962 to examine methods of crime prevention and the treatment of offenders, it recommended that full-time probation officers should continue to be employed in Dublin only, since the amount of probation work arising would not justify full-time appointments elsewhere. Nevertheless, the need was seen to strengthen the probation services available outside of Dublin and the Probation Administration Officer, who now heads the service, has been engaged in recruiting the services of voluntary societies and persons interested in probation work with a view to providing a voluntary probation service on an organised basis throughout the country. The response has been most encouraging. In 77 centres, outside Dublin, the courts now have available to them the services of voluntary probation workers. In the next year or so it is hoped to have a network covering the whole country. It is hoped, furthermore, to provide an effective after-care service on a personal basis for children and young persons discharged from industrial and reformatory schools.
Deputies will, no doubt, have adverted to the extent to which the voluntary effort of private individuals and societies is a feature of these recent developments. So far from making excuses for my Department's efforts to enlist voluntary participation in the penal and preventive services, I wish to emphasise it. It is not a question of saving money, neither is it a question of passing on to the public at large duties that should be performed by professional personnel. In matters of this kind community participation is vital. The experience of countries such as Sweden which have a fairly highly developed probation service on voluntary lines impresses me on the desirability—even the necessity—for community participation in social schemes of this kind.
The after-care of prisoners and persons who have been for long spells in institutions is not something that can be given otherwise than through a personal relationship, a continuing contact with guidance and moral support, and it must be available when it is needed, where it is needed, by a person who often fights shy of the world of officialdom and institutions. I am glad to say that the help sought here has been forthcoming. In acknowledging the assistance of the many voluntary bodies and private individuals who support our efforts here—the Visiting Committees of Mountjoy, Portlaoise and Limerick Prisons and St. Patrick's Institution, the several branches of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, of the Legion of Mary, the St. Patrick's Welfare Association, the Discharged Protestant Prisoners' Aid Society, the Salvation Army, the Mountjoy Prison After-Care Committee and, finally, though by no means least, those employers who accept the recommendation of the prison authorities and enable a prisoner to make a fresh start in decent employment—I should like to assure them that their participation is a vital and necessary part of all the Government's efforts towards crime prevention.
The next Vote, No. 26, is that for the Courts. At £583,000 it shows an increase of £80,270 over last year. The additional provision is required in the main to meet some increase in the number of posts, mainly in District Court Offices.
The District Court, Circuit Court and Superior Court Rules Committees have been actively engaged during the past year.
The District Court Rules Committee continued their work in connection with the general provision of the existing District Court Rules. The Committee submitted for my concurrence two sets of Rules, made during the year, relating to District Court Costs and Extradition Act, 1965.
The Circuit Court Rules Committee made the Circuit Court Rules (No. 1) of 1965 relating to a miscellaneous group of items. These Rules have received my concurrence.
The principal matter which engaged the attention of the Superior Courts Rules Committee during 1965 was the preparation of Superior Courts Rules relating to the winding up of companies to replace the earlier Rules based on the Companies Acts, 1908-1959; this was necessitated by the enactment of the Companies Act, 1963. The new Rules relating to the winding up of companies—the Rules of the Superior Courts (No. 1) 1966—were made on 1st February, 1966. A number of other miscellaneous matters were considered by the Committee during the course of the year. I should like to pay a special tribute to the judges of the several courts who are voluntarily assisting the work of the Department of Justice in which I might describe as personal, non-judicial capacities. I refer to the justices and judges who are serving in the Adoption Board, the Bankruptcy Committee, the Censorship of Films Appeal Board, the Censorship of Publications Board and Appeal Board, the Committee inquiring into Court Practices and Procedures, the Committee inquiring into the law relating to landlord and tenant and ground rents and a Committee recently formed which is making inquiries relating to reform of substantive law. The extent to which I am indebted to the judiciary in these respects is very great.
Estimate No. 27 is that for the Land Registry and Registry of Deeds. This year's figure of £257,930 represents an increase of £32,660 over last year. The additional provision is necessary to meet increases in remuneration and the cost of additional staff that will be necessary to discharge the new duties arising for the Land Registry on the coming into operation of the Registration of Title Act, 1964.
The progressive increase in the business being transacted in the Land Registry during recent years, continues. The number of dealings received for registration rose from 31,910 in 1962, to 33,062 in 1963, to 35,321 in 1964 and to 37,052 in 1965; applications for discharge of equities rose from 1,916 to 2,132 to 2,282 and to 2,351 for the same years. However, applications for Land Certificates which had increased by approximately 1,000 over the period 1962 to 1964 dropped by 800 in 1965 as compared with 1964.
In the case of the Registry of Deeds, the number of registrations rose from 24,689 in 1962, to 27,563 in 1963, to 29,508 in 1964 and dropped to 27,879 in 1965. Applications for searches increased from 6,249 to 6,709 over the period 1962 to 1964 and dropped to 5,233 in 1965.
With regard to the provision of additional accommodation to meet the needs of the Land Registry in the years immediately ahead, I am glad to be able to say that work commenced last May on a two-storey extension over the Public Record Office which will be linked to the Land Registry building. The contract calls for completion by 5th January, 1968.
I have already mentioned that I have appointed 1st January, 1967, as the commencement date of the Registration of Title Act, 1964. As I have said, I have to ensure that the Land Registry is adequately geared to cope with the additional work that will be involved. However, the difficulties which I reported as being encountered last year in recruiting the necessary qualified Legal and Technical Staffs have continued and my Department has been giving close attention to the solution of these difficulties. The failure of the last open competition for posts as Legal Assistants to attract a sufficient number of candidates compelled me to recruit legal assistants on a temporary basis. These have now taken up duty.
As to the additional clerical and technical staffs required, some of the additional clerical staff have already taken up duty and arrangements for the recruitment of the additional technical staff are now well advanced. I am confident that all the additional staff required will be recruited in time.
The installation recently of a new Copyflo machine for copying documents represents a major step in modernising methods in the Land Registry. This new equipment prints documents at the rate of 20 feet per minute; the width of the paper is 13 inches. In addition to catering for all the needs of the Land Registry, the new equipment will meet all demands of the Public Record Office, and of the Central Scrivenery Office, in the matter of the prompt and efficient copying of documents.
The final Vote makes provision for the Office of Charitable Donations and Bequests. The Estimate for 1966-67 is £12,830, that is £1,250 higher than the total provided for this service in 1965-66. The increase arises from the grant of normal increments and also from some salary increases fixed under the conciliation and arbitration scheme.
The useful and valuable work of the Commissioners continued during the year. Cash amounting to £94,695 and stocks to the value of £4,744 were transferred to the Commissioners during the year 1965, and on 31st December last the nominal value of investments standing in their name was £1,969,887.
It remains for me to express my sincere thanks to the members of the various voluntary boards and commissions which are associated with my Department for their valuable services during the year. Since my appointment as Minister for Justice, I have been deeply impressed by the extent of this unpaid public service and by the way in which the persons concerned have carried out their duties.
