Vol. 226 No. 13
asked the Minister for Justice if he has received complaints with regard to prison conditions in Mountjoy jail that (1) cells are unheated, (2) beds are dirty, (3) windows were broken and (4) the standard of food was very poor and unpalatable; and if he will make a statement on the general conditions for prisoners at Mountjoy jail.
36.
asked the Minister for Justice if he is aware of the statements circulated by the solicitor acting for the members of the NFA in Mountjoy jail; and, if so, what action he proposes to take in the matter.
37.
asked the Minister for Justice if he is aware that the standard of food offered to the farmer prisoners in Mountjoy is very bad; and if he proposes to have it improved.
38.
(South Tipperary), Mr. T. Dunne and Mr. Creed asked the Minister for Justice if he is aware of the objectionable conditions under which NFA members are being imprisoned; and if he will take steps to rectify this immediately.
With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 35 to 38 together.
I would refer Deputies to my reply yesterday to a question by Deputy Clinton in relation to unfounded allegations that prisoners were required to sleep in unheated cells.
As I have already mentioned, none of the prisoners in question made any complaint to the Prison Governor or to the members of the Visiting Committee as to the prison conditions although each prisoner was informed of his rights in this regard. On the day that the allegations were published by an NFA visitor to the prison a member of the Visiting Committee spoke to a number of these prisoners and recorded that he had found them happy and that he was satisfied that there was no foundation for the allegations.
In addition to the allegations which I refuted yesterday, further allegations were made that the cells were dirty and that the food was served in unhygienic utensils and was so unpalatable that the prisoners were unable to partake of it.
There is no truth whatsoever in these allegations. Prison cells are in spotless condition when prisoners are allocated to them and it is the responsibility thereafter of each prisoner to keep his cell clean and tidy. Fresh bed-clothes including four blankets are issued to each prisoner on reception and the bed linen is changed every week.
As regards food the prison dietaries are prescribed in Appendix 1 of the General Prison Regulations 1953 and these dietaries are varied from time to time on the joint recommendation of the Governor and the Prison Medical Officer. The present dietary provides for four meals a day. The Rules require the medical officer to make frequent inspections of the food, both cooked and uncooked, and they also require the Governor to carry out daily inspection of the kitchen. I may add that the bakery and kitchen have modern equipment and are kept in spotless condition.
Members of a Visiting Committee of 12, appointed pursuant in statute, have a right to inspect the prison at any time, either individually or collectively, to examine the conditions including the cell accommodation, the dieting and cooking arrangements and to consider and report on any complaints of prisoners. I am happy to say that the Members of the Mountjoy Visiting Committee are most conscientious in the discharge of their duties.
I understand considerable improvements have been made since this matter has been publicised. However, I understand the Minister to say yesterday that if he had an application from any of the Members of this House to inspect the cells he would gladly give that permission. As he is aware, Deputy Esmonde and I went there yesterday and were refused permission to see the cells.
On the grounds of courtesy, I gave permission to four Fine Gael Deputies to go to Mountioy yesterday to visit friends or constituents. I understand that the demand made by one of them on presenting himself was to see the prisoners at large and to inspect their conditions. This I refuse to allow and will continue to refuse to allow.
I could appreciate that, but is it not a fact that one of the Deputies asked if he could inspect the cells and he was told that he could not.
If Deputies approach me in a genuine and a conscientious way they will get facilities. This happens to be my discretion. I facilitated the Deputies in question yesterday and when they did not behave themselves, I refuse to extend any further facilities.
Surely the Minister will agree it is the right of any Member of this House, on getting permission, to visit any prisoner, to inspect the prison and discuss matters with the prisoners.
Let us get this matter into perspective. Deputies have no further rights than members of the public in regard to permission to visit Mountjoy or any other prison. I am certainly anxious to facilitate members and, very promptly yesterday, I acceded to a request from Deputies, but my confidence in that respect was not honoured. I am prepared to facilitate any Member of this House in visiting relatives or constituents or going into the prison on genuine grounds. At all stages I would take every humanitarian and logical factor into account in making such facilities available. But I am not going to allow a prison of this State to be used as a centre of agitation by mischievous Deputies or mischievous members of the public.
The Minister has just stated that Deputies misbehaved themselves in Mountjoy yesterday. Would he like to tell the House what from that misbehaviour took?
The Deputy is one of the people who came to me yesterday and said he wished to see some prisoner in Mountjoy, and I immediately facilitated him in that respect. I understand that on his arrival there he wanted to present himself to the prisoners at large presumably with a view to organising some sort of group agitation or something of that kind. This appeared to be the only purpose of his request, to interview the prisoners at large, and this I will not tolerate.
Would the Minister not agree that he gave an undertaking in the House yesterday that he would grant permission to any Deputy to inspect Mountjoy Prison? After Question Time, Deputy Esmonde and I visited the Minister's office. We did not ask any permission to visit a friend or relatve. We asked for permission to visit Mountjoy and when we got there, we were refused permission, except that we were told we could visit a prisoner or prisoners individually.
Precisely.
I want also completely to contradict what the Minister has said, we did not make a nuisance of ourselves?
The Minister for Finance has said it is no business of the Opposition to inspect the prison. I submit it is, and it should be his business. There are other things he is more concerned about.
I wish to put it on record——
I am asking the Minister to withdraw his charge that Deputy O'Donnell and I misbehaved in Mountjoy Prison. Deputies may laugh, but is it right that an Irish Government should refuse the right of Irish Deputies to visit a prison? Would the Minister answer the question? If the Minister says we misbehaved ourselves, we are entitled to be told what we did there?
What is the source of the information the Minister has that we attempted to address the prisoners?
Will the Deputy——
Will the Minister answer the question?
Chair, Chair.
Will the Minister not say——
Will the Deputy resume his seat? The Minister wants to reply.
I want to ask one question in a calm manner. Did the Minister not give an undertaking to the House that he would allow Deputies to go to Mountjoy to inspect —I emphasise the word "inspect"— the prison conditions? When Deputy Esmonde and I went to his office, that was the permission we sought.
Deputies know I have the name of being reasonable in regard to acceding to their requests. On receipt of a request from four Fine Gael Deputies yesterday, I gave them every facility. They wanted to see, as they conveyed to me, friend or constituent — it was put differently in each of the four cases — who were in Mountjoy. I am certainly going to use my discretion as Minister for Justice in regard to facilitating them for any other purpose. As regards withdrawing anything, they can withdraw from my office in relation to coming in to me for any such request any more because the confidence that was exchanged on that occasion was not honoured by them.
Arising out of that reply, does the Minister appreciate that the remarks he has made here this afternoon with regard to particular Deputies, two of whom he named——
Yes.
——are particularly serious——
Indeed, they are.
——and does he realise that both the Deputies in question have asked the Minister either to substantiate or to withdraw the charges? Every Deputy is, I think, entitled to that courtesy from the Minister when a charge of that description has been made and I, on behalf of my colleagues in this Party, would now ask the Minister either to substantiate or to withdraw the charges he has levelled against Deputy Esmonde and Deputy T. O'Donnell that——
That what?
——that they misconducted themselves and broke the Minister's confidence by the manner in which they conducted themselves on their visit to Mountjoy?
I will not withdraw.
The Minister made a charge that they endeavoured to hold a public meeting of the prisoners there. What evidence is there of that?
I will not withdraw my statement.
Will the Minister substantiate it?
I will not withdraw my statement that, on the assurances given to me by the Deputies concerned, I gave immediate instructions to the Governor of Mountjoy Prison that they were to be received. My assurances from both the Deputies concerned were identical in that the request was to see particular prisoners in whom they were interested——
No, no.
——and it is certainly too much of a coincidence that both my recollection and what actually transpired at Mountjoy Prison are identical. All this has done is that, as far as the future is concerned, I am certainly not going to give any confidence or take any assurances.
Arising out of that reply, there may have been a misunderstanding about the arrangements. Will the Minister take it that the two Deputies concerned—Deputy Esmonde and Deputy T. O'Donnell— understood the position to be that they got permission to visit without seeking, or getting, permission to visit individuals? I am quite prepared to accept, if that does not correspond with the Minister's recollection, that there may have been a misunderstanding as between them; but that is clearly the recollection of these Deputies and I think the Minister should accept it. While I am on my feet, might I ask the Minister if he is making arrangements to facilitate Deputies who wish to visit prisoners in Mountjoy, members of the NFA, will he ensure that similar facilities are extended to clergy who wish to make visits? There seems to have been some difficulty there also.
In case there is any further misunderstanding — I accept there may have been though I am quite clear in my own mind as to what was said and done—I want to assure the Deputy that if any Deputy, cleric or relative wants to see any friend or relative who happens to be in prison consequent on road blockages, he will be facilitated in every respect by me. Such people have been facilitated over the past week and will continue to be so facilitated. If there has been any misunderstanding in regard to that, then I hope it will not happen again, but I want to make it quite clear to the House precisely where I stand in this matter and precisely how people will be facilitated.
In case there might be any further confusion, is it quite clear that such visits will not be regarded as part of the ordinary quota of visits?
Yes, on application to me.
Can the Minister explain why two Deputies were refused permission to see——
I am calling Question No. 39.
39.
asked the Minister for Justice why Members of the Dáil who endeavoured to visit constituents in Mountjoy jail on Thursday, 23rd February, 1967, were refused admittance, except on Ministerial order.
40.
(South Tipperary), Mr. T. Dunne and Mr. Creed asked the Minister for Justice under what statutory authority he prevented Members of Dáil Éireann from visiting members of the NFA in prison.
With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 39 and 40 together.
Rule 119 of the Rules for the Government of Prisons—Statutory Instrument No. 320 of 1947—restricts the categories of persons who may be admitted to prisons by the Governors, except as provided by statute or authorised by instructions issued by the Minister for Justice.
Communications between prisoners and their relatives, legal advisers and friends are provided for in the Rules, in particular in Rule 59, and in Appendix No. 2 of the General Prisons Regulations 1953 which were published and placed on sale through the Stationery Office.
Arising out of that reply, do I take it the Minister has now stated that he will allow the two Deputies who went to Mountjoy yesterday to go back again?
I think the most appropriate action would be for Deputies in the Fine Gael Party to do their homework and read the regulations to which I have referred.
In other words, nobody is allowed into Mountjoy. Is that not the position?
Unless they are in the NFA.
Order. Question No. 41.
