Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 29 Oct 1968

Vol. 236 No. 9

Committee on Finance. - Vote 20—Office of the Minister for Justice.

I move:

That a sum not exceeding £292,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1969, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Minister for Justice, and of certain other Services administered by that Office, including a Grant-in-Aid; and of the Public Record Office, and of the Keeper of State Papers and for the purchase of Historical Documents, etc.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 has been the practice in previous years, to treat the six Votes 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 £11,660,000. The total provision for the year 1967/68 was £11,668,550. The total provision for the present year is, therefore, lower by £8,550 than the corresponding figure for last year.

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 £13,400. This increase is accounted for mainly by the provision of £10,000 for additional assistance that is essential to enable some of the overtaxed administrative divisions to deal more expeditiously and efficiently with the growing volume of work in such fields as criminal legislation, road traffic control, international agreements and conciliation and arbitration; and to deal with new work arising from the implementation of recommendations of the Committee on Court Practice and Procedure and from the centralisation in my Department as from 1st August this year of responsibility for the payment of the expenses of State witnesses in criminal cases.

The balance of the increase is accounted for by normal incremental progression.

The law reform activities of my Department continue to make satisfactory progress, and it is my intention, in what is of necessity a long-term programme, to give priority to the preparation of measures which are of practical importance to the general body of our citizens.

The text of the Criminal Justice Bill, 1967, was circulated last May and, as the Bill will be coming up for debate on the Second Stage in the near future, I do not propose to say anything more about it now other than to mention that there has been a great deal of misconception and misrepresentation as to the purposes and effects of some provisions of this Bill which I hope to dispel on Second Reading.

I hope to bring before the Oireachtas later this year proposals to amend and consolidate the law relating to the registration of deeds. These proposals will include measures designed to modernise the practice and procedure in the Registry of Deeds.

The Committee on Court Practice and Procedure have submitted eight interim reports, and have at my request, made available to me quite recently the portion of their ninth interim report which deals with the organisation of the district court in Dublin City and County. In this advance section of their report, the committee recommended unanimously certain changes in the structure of the district court in Dublin City and County. This section of the report has been circulated for the views of those affected, i.e., the Justices concerned, the Incorporated Law Society, the Bar Council, the local authorities and the Garda Síochána.

The first of the Reports from the Committee on Court Practice and Procedure dealt with the preliminary investigation of indictable offences; and the Criminal Procedure Act, 1967, which came into operation on 1st August, 1967, is based on this report.

Three of the interim reports deal with the jury system, and another deals with the question of increased jurisdiction for the district and circuit courts. Proposals for legislation are at present being prepared on these and other related matters, and I shall submit these proposals to the Government shortly.

Two reports deal with the reorganisation of the structure of the courts on the criminal side. I hope to introduce amending legislation, based on these reports, in due course.

While I am on this question of criminal law, I should mention that I have decided to examine as a matter of urgency the present law as to bail, which, as I see it, is highly unsatisfactory. I doubt very much if the protection of the liberty of the individual requires that every accused person must be granted bail unless there is substantial evidence that he would be likely to abscond or evade justice. The law officers and the Garda are aware that in a great many cases of persons awaiting trial, persons, indeed, with a previous record of criminal convictions, the grant of bail is availed of to commit other crimes similar to those with which they are charged.

I am quite satisfied from the facts placed before me by responsible police officers that in the 12 months ended 30th September, 1967, some 150 persons granted bail by the courts while awaiting trial committed over 500 fresh offences against property. The Garda authorities have pointed out to me that there must be many more of these bail cases which have not come to light. To my mind, in this day and age of widespread crime, it is unreal not to take into account, in bail applications, the previous bad character of an accused and the views of responsible police officers that there is a likelihood of further criminal acts if the accused is on bail pending trial. In this connection it is of interest to note that, at a conference held in Lagos in 1961 under the auspices of the International Commission of Jurists, it was laid down as a fundamental principle of penal law that courts and magistrates shall permit an accused person to be or to remain free pending trial except in the following cases which are deemed proper grounds for refusing bail:—

(a) in the case of a very grave offence; (b) if the accused is likely to interfere with witnesses or impede the course of justice; (c) if the accused is likely to commit the same or other offences; (d) if the accused may fail to appear for trial.

A prisoner facing a heavy sentence has little to lose if he commits further offences. He may consider that he has to go to prison in any event and in an effort to get money may commit further offences.

Moreover, the Constitution imposes a specific obligation on the State by its laws to protect as best it may from unjust attack the life, person and property rights of every citizen. I do not see how we as legislators can be said to be discharging this obligation if we do not take measures to ensure that the general public will be adequately protected from persons who by their criminal acts over a long period, and in particular by their continued and deliberate defiance of the law while on bail, are making nonsense of the protection which the Constitution purports to guarantee to law-abiding citizens.

I do not want anything I have said to suggest that I am not as anxious as anyone else to safeguard the liberty of the individual and the presumption of innocence in criminal proceedings, but there is surely scope for achieving a better balance between the rights of individuals and the reasonable rights of the community in these matters.

To revert to the activities of the Committee on Court Practice and Procedure, I should mention that the Committee's eighth interim report deals with the service of court documents by post and the fees of professional witnesses.

One of the specific matters which is engaging my attention at present is the regulation of solicitors' costs. The present system whereby solicitors' remuneration is determined by five separate statutory bodies is open to serious question. It seems to me that the proper way to deal with the problem is to have solicitors' costs determined by a single authority. I have in mind to provide in legislation for the appointment of a small advisory committee consisting of not more than, say, ten persons to formally advise the Minister on matters in relation to costs or charges. I envisage also that this committee would be empowered to take evidence in public and to receive representations from the Council of the Incorporated Law Society and the Bar Council and from any other interested bodies or persons. This whole question is under examination at the moment and I hope to deal with it in the proposed legislation to increase the jurisdiction of the district and circuit courts.

Legislation is at present being prepared to consolidate, amend and reform the law on compensation for malicious injuries. Apart from revising the present system of compensation for damage to property, the Bill proposes to introduce a completely new system of compensation, as of right, for persons killed or injured while coming to the assistance of the Garda, while preventing crime or while saving life. I hope to bring this Bill before the Oireachtas before the end of the present session.

I am also having legislation prepared to provide for the enforcement of foreign judgements in this country on a reciprocal basis. There will be two Bills, one relating to maintenance and affiliation orders and the second dealing with other judgements. Negotiations are in progress with the British and Northern Ireland authorities on both measures. In addition, I propose to make provision in the Courts (Jurisdiction) Bill already mentioned for an increase in the maximum amount of maintenance which the district court may award to deserted wives and to empower the court to order the payment of maintenance allowances in respect of children in desertion cases.

During the year the Landlord and Tenant Commission completed and presented their Report on Occupational Tenancies under the Landlord and Tenant Act, 1931. The Government have considered and accepted in principle the recommendations in the report. Legislation is at present being drafted to give effect to the Commission's recommendations and I hope to bring the Bill before the Oireachtas later this year. The Bill will repeal the relevant provisions of the 1931 Act and re-enact them with the amendments proposed by the Commission.

The Commission have also submitted their second report which deals with the question of extending the categories of persons entitled to reversionary leases and to buy out the fee simple as well as the question of whether lessees holding their dwellings from local authorities under purchase schemes should be given the right to purchase the fee simple. I have their recommendations under examination at present with a view to preparing new legislation. It may be possible to deal with these matters in the Bill on occupational tenancies.

The Commission are now proceeding with their main task, which is to examine the entire body of landlord and tenant law with a view to modernising and consolidating it. It is my hope that within the next few years it will be possible to have a comprehensive statute enacted which will repeal Deasy's Act of 1860 and the other Landlord and Tenant Acts and contain a full statement of all the statute law on this subject.

The Adoption Board made 1,493 orders in 1967, 315 more than in 1966, and this is the highest number ever. There has in fact been a steady increase in the number of orders being made in recent years. The proportion of children placed by Adoption Societies was 78 per cent, slightly more than last year's 77 per cent. I should like to place on record my appreciation of the excellent work that is being done by the Adoption Societies, of whom there are 21. Seven hundred and sixty-two of the orders made in 1967 were in respect of boys and 731 in respect of girls. The board continue to hold sittings outside Dublin so as to facilitate prospective adopters. Forty of the total of 98 meetings held during the year were held in various centres outside Dublin.

There has been little change during the years in the number of aliens registered as being resident here for three months or more, but the influx of visitors continues to increase at a rapid rate. More than 116,000 alien visitors came here in 1967 from places other than Britain or Northern Ireland as compared with 96,000 in 1966. Those figures do not, of course, include Irish citizens or British subjects. The increasing number of foreign visitors coming here creates problems for the immigration service. These problems are, however, under constant review by my Department in consultation with the other Government Departments concerned.

In 1967, 57 persons were naturalised as compared with 79 in 1966. This brings the total of all persons naturalised since 1935, when provision for naturalisation was made, to 2,617.

In 1967 the Film Censor examined 983 films with a total footage of 3,118,293. The number of films examined by the Censor in 1966 was 1,016 and the footage examined in that year was 3,084,525.

Of the total of 983 films which the Censor examined in 1967, 890 were passed, 71 were passed with cuts and 22 were rejected. He issued 86 limited certificates which were not the subject of appeals.

The Censorship of Films Appeal Board examined 31 films. Six of the appeals related to "limited certificates" issued by the Censor. Ten films were rejected by the Appeal Board. one was passed without cuts for general viewing and ten were passed for limited viewing, eight of them with cuts. In the case of the six appeals against the limited certificates issued by the censor, four were passed for general viewing and two were passed for limited viewing.

In all, 99 films were passed for viewing on "limited certificates", i.e., conditions were inserted prohibiting their exhibition to audiences under a stated age—the particular age being specified in each "limited certificate".

The Censorship of Publication Board examined 309 books and five periodicals in 1967. Fourteen books were examined as a result of formal complaints from members of the public and 295 books were referred to the board by officers of customs and excise. The board made 175 prohibition orders in respect of books and one in respect of a periodical.

Appeals were lodged with the Censorship of Publications Appeals Board in respect of three books. Two of the appeals were successful and consideration of the third is no longer necessary as the prohibition order made in respect of it has now expired under the Censorship of Publications Act, 1967, which became law on 11th July, 1967. That Act provides for a time limit of 12 years for prohibition orders made in respect of books on the ground that they are indecent or obscene and it revoked the provision in the 1946 Act that required an appeal against a prohibition order in respect of a book to be taken within 12 months.

Transfers of testamentary documents from the Principal and District Probate Registries and from the Courts were temporarily suspended in October, 1966, owing to building operations on the two-storey extension to the Public Record Office to provide additional accommodation for the Land Registry. Some testamentary and other miscellaneous documents have, however, been acquired since then.

The Irish Manuscripts Commission is continuing its work on the preparation for publication of the Calendar to the Council Book of 1581-'86, the list of political prisoners in Kilmainham Jail during the period 1789 to 1910, the two 16th century Munster surveys and the Record Commissioners' calendars of inquisitions for the 16th and 17th century Convert Rolls.

I now pass on to the Garda Síochána Vote. This shows an increase of £7,000 on the provision in the previous year's Estimate.

There is an increase of £78,000 in subhead A—salaries, wages and allowances. This increase arises mainly from the provision made for the appointment of traffic wardens as authorised by the Road Traffic Act, 1968, to carry out certain traffic duties connected with parking offences. The first batch of 20 wardens took up duty in Dublin at the beginning of October, the present number is 40, and I expect that by the end of the year the number will have risen to over 100. I am happy to say that the introduction of the new group has gone smoothly and that public reaction has been favourable.

I am also making arrangements to have typing and minor clerical work at the larger stations carried out by suitably qualified female personnel, thus making it possible to release Gardaí for outdoor police duties for which they are urgently needed. There is an additional provision of £18,000 in this subhead to meet increases in the rates of boot allowance, plain clothes allowance, detective allowance and transport and training allowances which have been granted in accordance with recommendations by the Garda Síochána Conciliation Council.

There is an increase of £31,000 in subhead B—travelling and incidental expenses. This is due mainly to the progressive improvement and extension of the radio service which has been taking place for some years and will continue.

The provision for Post Office services —subhead C—is up by over £50,000. This is due to the fact that there are outstanding charges for postal services for which provision has to be made this year.

The provision for superannuation— subhead G—shows an increase of £48,000. This is due to an increase in the number of pensioners and to the increase that was granted in pensions from 1st August, 1967.

The provision for Appropriations in Aid shows an increase of £197,000. This increase will come from the Road Fund to meet the rapidly rising costs of pay and equipment of the Garda Síochána engaged on road traffic duties. The increased provision will also cover the pay of the new traffic wardens.

The present Estimate for the Garda Síochána does not make provision for the 9 per cent salary increase recently granted to all ranks up to and including Chief Superintendent with effect from 1st June, 1968. This increase is on the same basis as the eleventh-round increases in the public services generally.

I have recently set up, at the request of the Garda Síochána Joint Representative Body, a Commission to inquire into and make recommendations to me in relation to Garda remuneration and conditions of service. We have been fortunate in obtaining for the Commission the voluntary services of four eminent persons under the chairmanship of Judge Conroy, and I should like to record my appreciation of their willingness to devote their skills and time to this onerous assignment.

As I indicated in a policy statement shortly after my appointment as Minister for Justice. I am engaged in a review of the present organisation and distribution of the Garda Síochána. It is clear that, if our police service is to maintain or improve on its standards of service, its strength must be increased fairly substantially or the existing structure must be overhauled so that the distribution of the force will reflect the needs of each locality and, in particular, requirements in relation to serious crime. As the annual cost of the force now stands at about £10,000,000 and as every additional Garda would cost a taxpayer about £1,000 a year, it is absolutely essential to make the best use of our existing manpower. All the members must be used to the best advantage in the prevention and detection of crime, the preservation of the peace and the handling of the serious problems arising from the huge increase in the number of vehicles on our roads, etc. It is estimated that, apart from Gardaí who are engaged full-time on road traffic duties, almost one-half of the time of the force as a whole is taken up on these duties. A review of the manpower situation is, therefore, a matter of urgency.

It is important also to keep under constant review the question of providing the force with up-to-date equipment. The mechanisation of the force is proceeding at a steady rate. There are now 272 motor-cars and 219 motor-cycles in the Garda fleet, as against 169 cars and 19 motor-cycles 10 years ago. I have already mentioned the provision for additional radio equipment. There has been a three-fold expansion in the radio service in the past four years. This expansion has brought the service to many provincial towns throughout the country. Personal pocket radios, which have been introduced in Dublin, have been a great success. This service will be intensified in Dublin and expanded to other large centres in the near future.

Modern office equipment of various kinds is also being provided. This includes an electronic punch-card system which should improve the efficiency of the Central Criminal Records Office. An up-to-date copier is being provided which will facilitate the keeping of criminal records and the supplying of information from Headquarters to the Gardaí at local level. A number of portable recording units are also being obtained. These will replace the traditional notebooks in the case of Gardaí who have to make on-the-spot records at the scene of crimes and traffic accidents.

I regret to say that in 1967 the crime figures increased again. In the year ended 30th September, 1967, 20,558 indictable offences were recorded as against 19,029 in the previous year. The next highest figures were in 1964 (17,700) and in 1943 (17,305).

Of the total of 20,558 indictable offences, 12,170 were committed in the Dublin Metropolitan Area and 8,388 in the rest of the country.

The increase in crime gives me cause for serious concern. It is, nevertheless, true that the incidence of indictable crime in this country is still low by comparison with what is happening in many other countries in Europe and further afield. It is a cause for satisfaction that our detection rate still continues at the high level of 64 per cent, which is away beyond what is achieved in any other country the statistics of which we have studied.

In this connection I would remind the House that larcenies, generally, even where the value of the money or goods stolen is trivial, are indictable offences. The figures for indictable crime are invariably swollen by, for instance, larcenies of pedal bicycles, for which, incidentally, it is very difficult to get evidence against the culprits. In 1967, 1,936 bicycles were reported as stolen and proceedings were instituted in 316 cases only.

Those convicted of indictable crimes last year numbered 9,521 and of this total 31 per cent were under 17 and 57 per cent under 21 years of age. The comparable figure for 1966 was 9,220, of whom 34 per cent were under 17 and 59 per cent under 21.

In the year ended 30th September, 1967, the number of persons charged with summary offences was 164,068 as compared with 150,213 in 1966, a steep rise which is in accordance with the trend of recent years. Road traffic offences continue to constitute by far the greatest category—some 123,000 persons were prosecuted for road traffic offences in 1967. Nearly 97,000 fine-on-the-spot notices were issued for contraventions of the parking bye-laws and similar offences and in slightly less than 15,000 of those cases there were prosecutions. In the Road Traffic Act, 1968, provision has been made for the taking over of "fine-on-the-spot" duties from the Gardaí by a special corps of wardens. This will permit the Gardaí to concentrate on their primary duty of detecting and preventing serious crime. A number of wardens have already been recruited and have taken up duty in Dublin city. Further appointments will be made.

No difficulty has been met in the operation of the statutory arrangements for the backing of Irish warrants of arrest in Britain and Northern Ireland, and for the backing of British and Northern Ireland warrants here. In 1967, 128 warrants, 23 of them from Northern Ireland, were received for execution here and 83 warrants were issued from here, nine of them to Northern Ireland. So far no warrants have been received from any of the other countries who are parties to the European Convention on Extradition, nor have any warrants issued from this country to any of them.

Before I pass on from this Vote the House will no doubt be interested to know that since the 1st August, 1968, a simpler and more direct method of payment of the expenses of State witnesses in criminal prosecutions has been in operation. The previous method of payment was unsatisfactory involving as it did three Departments of State, local authorities, the Chief State Solicitor, local State Solicitors, County Registrars and the Garda Síochána. Under the new system the bulk of witnesses claims are paid locally by the Garda Síochána and a relatively small number of contentious claims are referred to my Department for payment. This has had the effect of expediting payment and will ultimately relieve local authorities and all others of any responsibilities in the matter. From the 1st April next year these expenses will be borne by the Garda Síochána Vote.

The next item in the list of Estimates, the Vote for Prisons, is for a sum of £449,000 which shows a net decrease of £9,500 in the Vote for 1967/68. The changes in the Vote as compared with the previous financial year are in the main reflected in subheads B and C where increases in the cost of victualling, clothing, fuel, etc., due to an anticipated increase in the prison population, and additional requirements for escort and travelling, as aresult of higher transport charges and subsistence rates, are more than off-set by a decrease in the provision for the maintenance of prisoners in district mental hospitals.

There is also a decrease of £2,000 in the provision for materials for the manufacturing department and farm: stocks in hand make it possible to reduce purchase of materials below that which would normally be necessary. The saving in the financial requirements for the maintenance of prisoners in district mental hospitals is the result of a ruling of the Supreme Court that the statutory provisions, which enabled the Minister for Justice to transfer to district mental hospitals from prisons persons who had been certified to be insane while on remand in custody from the district court, were legally operative only in respect of the period of remand ordered by the court and that persons so removed and detained in hospital after the expiry of the period of remand ceased to remain within the jurisdiction of the court. As a consequence of this ruling the maintenance of a number of patients in the hospitals ceased to be the responsibility of the Minister for Justice.

The Estimate provides for a daily average population of 580, as against 570 in 1967-68. The increased provision is due mainly to the impact on daily inmate figures of the larger numbers of offenders receiving long or fairly long term sentences. As compared with the year 1966 there was an increase of 95 in the number of offenders who were given sentences of imprisonment or detention of six months and upwards in 1967, the figures being 846 and 751 respectively.

The total number of committals of persons under both sentences of imprisonment and of detention in St. Patrick's Institution during 1967 was 2,789 as against 2,528 for 1966. Of this number of 2,789, 833 were young male offenders in the 16 to 21 age group, of whom 635 were sentenced to detention and 198 were committed to prison.

This shows an increase of six over 1966 when 616 youths received sentences of detention while 211 others were sent to prison. The increase is small in itself and might indeed be taken to reflect favourably on our preventive measures to combat juvenile crime when regard is had to the increasing population in the young adult age groups: according to the census returns, the number of young males between 17 years and 21 years had increased from 82,000 in 1960 to 99,000 in 1966.

Because of inadequate accommodation it was not possible to transfer from prisons to St. Patrick's young offenders who might derive more benefit from treatment in the latter institution and this has made it necessary to explore further the question of additional or alternative accommodation for the inmates of St. Patrick's Institution. Moreover, the pressure on space in St. Patrick's has not made it possible to segregate inmates to the extent that one would like and has inhibited improvements in the institution's educational, vocational and recreational activities. Up to the present, the efforts which have been made to obtain a suitable site within reasonable distance of Dublin for the erection of a new St. Patrick's have met with no success. Some improvement in the situation materialised in August of this year, when a State property in Shanganagh, which had until then been used as a residential college, was made available to my Department. The buildings stand in some twenty acres of ground and with some minor structural adaptations can accommodate 50 to 60 boys.

It is my intention to operate the new undertaking as a training centre for suitable first offenders and for selected long term inmates who show promise of improvement and of responding to guidance. What I have in mind is that training will be imparted in building construction, woodwork, decorating, vehicle driving and horticulture, which will help the boys to secure and retain worthwhile employment on release. Already a start has been made there with compensatory education to overcome the more obvious results of neglected schooling.

Instruction in woodwork has commenced also under the guidance of a vocational teacher. Vocational instruction will be extended shortly to some of the other skills I have outlined. There are now about 30 boys in residence and this number is gradually being increased to the full complement. The whole project is still only at a developing stage and legislation will probably be necessary to put the project on a long term formal basis, but by next year I expect that my hopes for Shanganagh will have materialised to the full.

The availability of this additional accommodation will allow of the introduction of a re-planned educational programme for St. Patrick's itself involving the appointment of an educational psychologist and the employment of additional instruction staff, aided by a corps of voluntary workers with teaching experience. In the latter connection I am pleased to record my appreciation of an offer, which I have gladly accepted, from the students of St. Patrick's Training College, Drumcondra, to participate in providing compensatory teaching.

I am glad to say that the prison welfare work and analogous services continue to operate satisfactorily. During 1967, as a result of the efforts of the prison staff and the prison welfare officers, employment during their sentences was secured for 26 prisoners who were granted daily temporary release to take up the employment obtained for them. The earnings of these prisoners in respect of their pre-discharge employment, after deductions for tax, insurance, etc., amounted to £2,250 approximately. A sum of £739 was contributed to their dependants; £444 was spent on tools and equipment, travelling between prison and places of employment and out of pocket expenses; expenses for special hostel meals and comforts accounted for £555, leaving something over £500 for the prisoners themselves on discharge.

In St. Patrick's Institution 35 inmates were granted daily temporary release for employment while serving their sentences of detention and, with one exception, all the inmates fulfilled the conditions of their temporary release. In addition to release for employment, temporary release was granted to 26 prisoners and to 39 inmates of St. Patrick's during the year for other purposes—Christmas holidays, domestic difficulties, family illnesses, interviews for employment, driving tuition; 12 inmates qualified as drivers during the year.

The development of the probation and after-care service on a voluntary basis is, thanks to the willing co-operation of the community at large and particularly the well-known charitable and religious organisations, also progressing in a most satisfactory manner. Voluntary workers are now available in upwards of 100 centres outside Dublin to give assistance to the courts in the supervision of young offenders and to help in the after-care of those discharged from industrial and reformatory schools and penal institutions.

In this connection I wish to mention particularly a project of the Cork Council of St. Vincent de Paul, namely, the establishment of a probation hostel for homeless boys or boys from bad or broken homes. The presence of this hostel has made it possible for the local courts to make probation orders with a residential condition in suitable cases where otherwise the alternative would have been to commit them to institutions. An annual grant of £750 is now being paid to this council.

Another project which is proving its worth is the Garda juvenile liaison officer scheme. The scheme which has been operating for some time in Dublin, Cork, Limerick and Waterford has now been extended to Clonmel, Drogheda, Dundalk, Galway, Kilkenny, Sligo, Tralee and Wexford. Since the scheme started in September, 1963 and up to the end of last September, 3,124 juveniles had come under the care and supervision of the Gardaí participating in the work. Of this number, 345 or 11 per cent have since become involved in further offences.

Apart from the numbers of the Garda force attached to the juvenile liaison unit, a large number of Gardaí continue to participate in a most praiseworthy and voluntary way in the organisation and day to day running of over 200 boys' clubs throughout the country.

It would be remiss of me to let this occasion pass without recording my indebtedness to the statutory visiting committees, the recognised societies engaged in welfare work, the voluntary organisations, the many private individuals and the employers whose generous efforts and ready co-operation proved so helpful a factor in the discharge of my responsibilities for the treatment of prisons offenders.

The next Vote is that for the courts. At £609,000 it shows a net decrease of £7,000 over the year 1967/68. The gross vote shows an increase of £11,550 which is accounted for by a small increase in district court staff, normal increments and an increase in mileage allowances. This increase is offset by an increase in appropriations-in-aid due to an increase in receipts from fines and fees.

The Rules Committees of the District Court, Circuit Court and Superior Court have been busy during the past year. The District Court Rules Committee continues its major task in connection with a general revision of the existing district court rules and additionally, with my concurrence, made the District Court (Criminal Procedure Act, 1967) Rules 1967 setting out the procedure to be followed in the preliminary examination of indictable offences under the Criminal Procedure Act, 1967.

The Circuit Court Rules Committee made the Circuit Court Rules (No. 2) 1967 prescribing new scales of costs and fees and the Circuit Court Rules (No. 3) 1967 providing for an increase in costs in certain cases settled before entry. The Rules received my concurrence. The Committee have also drafted new Circuit Court Rules on contentious business for the purposes of the Succession Act, 1965.

The Superior Courts Rules Committee made the Rules of the Superior Courts (No. 2), 1967, providing for a number of miscellaneous amendments to existing Rules and revision of costs in certain cases. Those Rules received my concurrence. The committee have drafted two sets of rules dealing respectively with contentious and noncontentious probate business, which are necessary under the Succession Act, 1965. These are being examined in consultation with the committee and in conjunction with draft rules on contentious business submitted by the Circuit Court Rules Committee.

I should like again to pay a special tribute to the judges of the several Courts who are voluntarily assisting the work of the Department of Justice in what I might describe as personal, non-judicial capacities. I refer to the judges and justices who are serving on the Bankruptcy Committee, the Censorship of Films Appeal Board, the Censorship of Publications Board and its Appeal Board, the Committee inquiring into Court Practice and Procedures, the Commission inquiring into the law relating to landlord and tenant and ground rents, a committee formed during the year under review which is making inquiries relating to reform of substantive law and the committee of inquiry into the pay and conditions of service of the Garda Síochána.

The extent to which I am indebted to the Judiciary in these respects is very great.

Estimate No. 24 is that for the Land Registry and Registry of Deeds. The figure of £299,000 for the year 1968-69 represents a decrease of £12,800 as compared with 1967-68. The decrease is accounted for mainly by the replacement of senior by junior officers and by a decrease in Post Office charges.

As forecast last year, the reversal in 1966 of the progressively upward trend in the volume of business coming into the Land Registry in recent years was short-lived. Business, in almost all the various categories handled by the Registry, increased again in 1967, and is continuing to increase in the current year. Dealings, for example, which had fallen from a record figure of 37,052 in 1965 to 33,875 in 1966 rose again in 1967 to 34,693. The indications are that the intake of dealings this year will be of the order of 40,000.

In the case of the Registry of Deeds the progressively upward trend in the number of registrations which had declined in 1965 and 1966 was also resumed in 1967, the number being 29,446 as compared with 27,879 in 1965 and 25,411 in 1966. Applications for searches also continued to increase, the figure for 1967 being 5,463 as compared with 5,324 in 1966.

With regard to the provision of additional accommodation to meet the needs of the Land Registry in the years immediately ahead, the construction work on a two-storey extension over the Public Record Office which commenced in May, 1966, has been completed and the new building is now in the process of being occupied. This should solve fully the problem of accommodation. There remain, however, the difficulties of recruiting and maintaining the necessary staff in all the branches of the Land Registry, with the result that delays are still giving rise to some complaints. I have arranged for a critical examination of the organisation and procedures in the Land Registry as the provision of a prompt and efficient service is one of my top priorities.

The final Vote makes provision for the Office of Charitable Donations and Bequests. The estimate for 1968-69 is £13,000, that is £350 more than the total provided for this service in 1967-68. The increase is accounted for principally by normal incremental progression.

The useful and valuable work of the Commissioners continued during the year. Cash amounting to £30,455 and stocks to the value of £17,635 were transferred to the Commissioners during the year 1967, and on 31st December last the nominal value of investments standing in their name was £2,064,295.

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. One of the things that impressed me deeply since my appointment as Minister for Justice is the extent of this unpaid public service and the manner in which persons concerned carry out their duties.

I commend the Estimate to the House.

I should like to share in the sentiments expressed in the last few sentences of the Minister's remarks. It is well that not only the House but the public should know of the voluntary services rendered by these boards, commissions and committees, the members of which are very often extremely busy in their professions.

I should like to take this opportunity of congratulating the new Commissioner of the Garda Síochána, Commissioner Weymes, on his appointment. In doing so, I should also like to put on the records of this House a small tribute to the outgoing Commissioner, Mr. Patrick Carroll, who has retired. Mr. Carroll could be described as one of the founder members of the Garda Síochána, a man who went into the service in the early days of the State and who undoubtedly was a very dedicated and devoted public servant and police officer. By his attention not only to the affairs of the Force, so far as the question of the preservation of law and order was concerned, but by his attention to and interest in the sporting and recreational activities which are associated with the Force he did immeasurable good during his term of office. It is only right that someone should record our appreciation of the magnificant service he gave to the State.

A few years ago, on the fiftieth anniversary of Easter Week, many people took a look behind them, took a look at the past and pointed out the faults and failures which had occurred during the half century since Easter Week. It was a good and a salutary exercise but we should not overlook the fact that one of the best, if not always the most fully appreciated, success stories of this State was the establishment, the subsequent growth and development of an unarmed police force here, the Garda Síochána. Their job, of course, is to preserve law and order and to do that impartially. Everyone will agree with me that down through the years since the establishment of the Garda we have been remarkably lucky, "remarkably" because of our past history for the reasons, which are historical now, that the inclination of the people of this country would have been towards antagonism and hostility to the then police force. Notwithstanding that history, which might have become ingrained in some of us, there have been extremely good relations between the Garda and the public. It would be a great pity, indeed, a tragedy, if anything were to occur which would disturb that sense of confidence which the people have in Garda and the co-operation which the Garda get from the people and are, I think, entitled to expect from the people. In this connection I want to say that it is up to all of us and up to the public at large to play our part and their part in upholding not only the authority but the kind of respect which exists and has existed throughout for the Garda Síochána as a force. I have read recently, and I have here with me, some remarks in what would be, I suppose, the editorial of the Garda Review for the month of June last and it seems to me that there must be in the force today at least some doubt as to whether the happy relations which have existed are going to continue unimpeded, because this article starts off by saying:

For some time now the Garda Síochána have been under a systematic and well organised attack from a small but increasingly active and mischievous faction. Some people prefer to use the word sinister in describing this small group. The imported term, police brutality, has been flung about by members of this group on various occasions, from different directions.

Later on in the course of this article it is stated:

We are concerned, however, at what appears to be an organised anti-police campaign in existence here. Several times recently, the same persons purporting to support popular and sympathy-evoking causes have taunted, baited and tried deliberately to antagonise Gardaí who were carrying out their duty. The same people would appear to be sympathetic to a variety of causes, some simulated, which they manage to engineer in order to bring them into direct conflict with members of the Force who are trying to maintain law and order.

This is the particular portion of the article that I want to refer to because it is essential that it should be heeded. The article goes on to say:

We think the public should be aware of this campaign. We are the servants of the public from whom, ultimately, we take our directions and whose interests we are here to protect.

It goes on later to say:

We believe that a "red" influence, much of it carefully cultivated among our emigrants in Britain, is trying to spread to organisations in this country. The representatives of this sinister ideology have infiltrated some existing organisations which promoted popular and deserving causes. They are attempting, we believe, to infiltrate community development and co-operative movements which they may use later as a base.

I want to say in connection with an appeal of that sort appearing in such a responsible magazine as the Garda Review that it is a matter which not merely this House but which the members of the public should pay heed to. We have had an extremely good police force in this country and we still have. We have had a police force which has in difficult times in the past carried out extremely well its function of the maintenance of law and order and has done that on an impartial basis. If the members of the Garda Síochána feel that it is necessary through an article such as this appering in the Garda Review to, so to speak, look to the public for help and understanding, then it is up to those of us in public life who appreciate the worth and the value of the Garda force in this country to underscore the appeal that has been made by them and to recommend it to the public in this country.

With regard to some of the more detailed matters dealt with by the Minister in his statement, towards the end of it he referred to a point I intended raising. It is the question of delays in dealings in the Land Registry. I want to say, talking for a moment as a legal practitioner, that I find the very greatest courtesy and efficiency among the personnel working in the Land Registry. I find that they are willing to do whatever they can to assist legal practitioners and to assist members of the public with whom they have to deal. But, as the Minister has mentioned in his statement, it is frustrating at times to encounter the delays that take place. I know of a particular case with which I was dealing where a matter was lodged in January last and has not yet been completed. From recollection, it is a question of first registration. I am not raising this by way of complaint but I am giving it as an example of the kind of thing that leads to frustration among legal practitioners. Naturally, clients, when they have left a thing with a solicitor, regard it as finished; and if a solicitor has to report in six, eight or ten months time that it still has not gone through the Land Registry I do not blame clients if they do not feel inclined to accept that as an excuse.

The Minister has mentioned and those of us who go down near the Four Courts know that the building programme for the Land Registry has been completed. However, he mentions in his statement: "There remain, however, the difficulties of recruiting and maintaining the necessary staff in all the branches of the Land Registry, with the result that delays are still giving rise to some complaints." I would like to know, because I do not understand it, why there is difficulty in recruiting and maintaining the necessary staff. Is the difficulty a financial one because if it is, speaking for myself in any event, I would feel that this House should vote whatever additional money is necessary to overcome it.

I would like to make this quite clear: I do not consider that the kind of work which the legal assistants and examiners in the Land Registry have to do is the kind of work that can be rushed unnecessarily. I do not think that you can require a legal assistant or an examiner in the Land Registry to fill a particular quota of cases in any given period, whether it is a day or a week or a month, because cases are going to vary enormously as regards the length of time required to examine them. They will vary enormously as regards difficulties that may be incurred concerning title and other technical matters. I do not think you can eliminate, or reasonably expect to eliminate, delays that might be incurred in cases requiring examination of title in the Land Registry by requiring the present personnel either to do more work or work faster. You cannot ask people to do more than they would be supposed to do in legal practice outside the Land Registry so that the difficulty seems, as the Minister has pointed out, to be the difficulty of recruiting the necessary additional personnel to avoid delays that occur. If the difficulty is a financial one, if the terms being offered to professional or other people required for service in the Land Registry are not sufficiently attractive I would urge the Minister to look for more money and see to it that sufficiently attractive terms are proposed in order to get the necessary additional staff.

I know that the Minister, who was a practising solicitor, is very well aware of this problem but I am not sure that the public are aware of it. A problem arises from the fact that so far as Land Registry transfers are concerned the transfers are only effective from the time of registration. This is completely different from the procedure in the Registry of Deeds. I know that once a transfer is registered the efficacy and validity date back to the time of the application but there is a procedure in the Land Registry when dealing with registered land that if a transfer is taking place there is a vendor and a purchaser and on completion of the sale the purchaser pays over his money and that is all as far as he is concerned. His money is gone and he gets in exchange the transfer but until that is registered it is not effective.

If there are delays in the Land Registry, if there are investigations there—and obviously there must be, once a State guaranteed title is being given in cases of compulsory registration—that is all right but if something turns up which is a flaw in the title, it does not get the person back his money. I should like the Minister who has had some personal experience of these matters to consider whether it would be possible to set up some system in the Land Registry whereby you could have an intermediate stage before full registration with a State-backed title. Before that takes place, if you could have some procedure such as that in the Registry of Deeds so that you could go along to the Land Registry and register there your transfer subject to any requisitions that may subsequently be raised in the Land Registry at least it would have the force and effect of registration and of validity as between the vendor and purchaser. Something on those lines might be possible and would relieve the pressure that will be there until something like that is done. If some system like that could be operated then, as between vendor and purchaser, the pressure would be off and everyone would know that the transfer had been lodged in the Land Registry and that it was effective subject to whatever requisitions the Land Registry might decide to raise in connection with it.

I also want to ask the Minister how the Act popularly called the Ground Rents Act is operated. The impression is that it is in danger of becoming a dead letter. I know that ground rents are being purchased under the Act, that some cases have gone for arbitration and have been dealt with by the County Registrar in Dublin and I assume by county registrars elsewhere but I have the impression, which I would like the Minister to correct if it is wrong, that in many cases potential purchasers of their ground rents, people who want to buy out the fee simple in their property under the Ground Rents Act, are finding that title difficulties in some cases are too enormous to enable them to tackle the purchase of a comparatively small ground rent without becoming involved in great expense.

Once or twice I suggested to the Minister's predecessor that it would be worth while to consider, in order to allow the Act to operate fully and effectively, introducing some provision whereby a declaratory title could be obtained, where the owner of the ground rent, the person selling it, has been in undisputed possession for a particular period. There should be some stereotyped form of declaration which would be accepted and acceptable with, so-to-speak, official backing, which would eliminate to a great extent the very rigorous and searching investigation and trouble that is frequently necessary now in some ground rent cases where the root of title is back in the dim and distant past.

I do not think the Minister referred to the position of county registrars in his statement and I would like to raise it. I understand that they are seeking an increase in their salaries and it seems that they have an extremely strong case to make to the Minister. The Minister and the House are aware that the judiciary and all its branches obtained fairly substantial salary increases from April last. It is accepted and, I think, always has been that county registrars are in effect judicial officers. It is not an exaggeration to say that many of their functions nowadays—and, indeed, this House has put additional functions on their shoulders in recent years, including functions under the Ground Rents Act that I have been referring to—are at least quasi-judicial in nature. For example, under the Ground Rents Act they are required to act as arbitrators. Vis-à-vis the district justices, the salary scales of county registrars have remained stationary while those of district justices, which used to be less than those of county registrars, have increased and may increase in future but they have been substantially increased as recently as last April while those of county registrars have remained stationary.

It is usually argued that one of the reasons why it is necessary to pay good salaries to members of the judiciary, whether they be district justices, circuit court judges or judges of the High Court or of the Supreme Court is in order to attract the best, in order to attract good men and also that it is essential that their independence should be safeguarded. I would urge on the Minister that those considerations are just as valid when applied to county registrars as they are in the case of the judiciary. Remember—this is a matter that is of special interest to Members of this House — county registrars throughout the country not only act as sheriffs but act as returning officers for elections and this is quite apart from what I called earlier their quasi-judicial functions. They are required to act as returning officers in elections and it should be of interest to every Member of the House to ensure that in relation to discharging that task, apart from any other tasks that they have to do, they are in a position of independence. I would ask the Minister at least to give very sympathetic consideration to the position of county registrars in their application for an increase. I feel, and I hope I am not wrong in this, that so far as the Minister himself is concerned I am probably pushing an open door in making that plea but I am hoping that the remarks I have made on the subject may be of some help to the Minister in making the case with his colleagues in the Government on behalf of the county registrars.

There is another matter that I should like to ask the Minister about because it is a matter that I have raised here before. It may be that it is covered in the legislation which the Minister forecast in his opening statement. It is with regard to the necessity of lodging parchment memorials in the Registry of Deeds. I took this matter up also with the Minister's predecessor and I understood—whether I was correct or not I do not know—that we were on the brink of departing from the necessity of having to lodge memorials on parchment in the Registry of Deeds and that there was a prospect that in the near future it would be possible either to lodge a full copy or certified copy of the document rather than have to go on with this procedure. I should like the Minister, if he can, to confirm that that is the position.

I should like the Minister also to let the House know how the free legal aid legislation is working out and if he could conveniently let us know the number of applications made for free legal aid and, generally, how the scheme is working and what the cost of it is.

I am glad to notice, as far as I could hear, that there was no mention made in the Minister's statement this year of closing down the Garda stations. In fact, I think the Minister referred to the necessity or desirability of increasing the number of men in the Force. I simply want to say, as I did on the occasion of the Estimate last year, that if it is desirable to increase the number of members of the Garda Síochána for the prevention or detection of crime and to carry out the work that it is necessary for the gardaí to do, I do not think the Minister should hesitate in trying to increase the numbers in the Force.

The Minister did refer to the crime figures and said that he was concerned about them. On page 13 of his brief he dealt with the question of crime and said that the increase in crime gave him cause for serious concern. It is no wonder that it does because, as the Minister has mentioned, for the year ended 30th September, 1967, the total number of indictable offences came to 20,558 as against 19,029 in the previous year. I think I am correct in saying that summary offences also showed an increase.

The Minister, quite correctly, refers then to the fact that the detection rate continues at the high level of 64 per cent. It is not as one who wishes to carp but simply to record the fact because I think it is rather disturbing, that I say that while the Minister is right in referring to the detection rate as being high at a level of 64 per cent, I think I am correct in saying that that, in fact, is a drop on the detection rate in previous years. For the year 1966, the detection rate was 66 per cent and in 1965 it was as high as 70 per cent. So that, while the 64 per cent to which the Minister referred is high, nevertheless, it shows a drop and it may be that more modern equipment is required. The Minister has referred to the question of equipment but I am still a firm believer in the efficacy of the man-on-the-beat, particularly in rural areas, and no question of shortage of manpower in the Garda should be allowed to hinder the Gardaí in either the prevention or the detection of crime.

The Minister referred also, towards the end of his speech, to the juvenile liaison officer scheme. I think it is a sergeant and eight or nine Gardaí and a couple of Ban-ghardaí who implement that scheme in the Dublin area anyhow and I should like again, as I did on previous occasions, to compliment them on the success of the scheme and the way it is operating. I think I am correct in saying that, generally speaking, the scheme applies to people who are under the age of 17 who have committed a minor offence in the stealing or larceny line, who admit it and who have not been in trouble previously with the Garda; and provided the parents co-operate and the injured person has no objection these people, instead of being dragged through the courts, even though it might only be the juvenile court, can be dealt with on the basis of a caution administered by the officers operating the scheme. This is an excellent thing. The low figures the Minister quoted in his statement of the number of juveniles who subsequently got into trouble having been dealt with under the scheme, about 11 per cent, show how successful the scheme has been. All of us would feel that not only is this a humane way of dealing with matters but one which, so to speak, pays dividends to the community, because instead of people who are not criminals, who are not going to be criminals, certainly if they are handled properly, being brought to the courts and having all the pain and the turmoil associated with that in their minds and in the minds of their parents and members of the family, they are dealt with by means of care, supervision and caution under this scheme. As I say, it is an excellent scheme. It is operating well, and the tribute that the Minister paid to it is a well deserved one.

There are some other matters I should like to raise by way of query to the Minister. I should like to know how the fines-on-the-spot scheme is progressing, whether it is felt it is one that has been worthwhile introducing and what effect it has had in speeding up court work in the district court. I should like to know, if the Minister has the figure available, what it has meant in cash to the Revenue.

I should also like to ask the Minister in a general way what he or his Department or the Government are doing to prepare for the harmonisation of legislation with the EEC countries in the event of this country becoming a member of the Common Market; and specifically I should like to know how do the Government propose to secure implementation of Community regulations which are binding in every respect and are directly applicable, I think, to each member State. This is a matter which must have been examined by the Minister's Department and the House should know what is contemplated in that direction. I know it is an unpopular word with the Government in these days but I should like to know will it be necessary to have a referendum to alter the Constitution in any way in connection with EEC membership should it come about. A discussion on those lines could take a long time, but, perhaps, the Minister would indicate generally the lines on which the Government are travelling in that direction and what Constitutional amendment, if any, would be necessary in the event of this country achieving membership.

I should also like to ask the Minister —I am not sure whether it is his function or that of the Taoiseach; I rather think it is the Minister's—whether any consideration has been given to the question of repealing the resolution declaring a state of national emergency which was passed by the Oireachtas as far back as 3rd September, 1939. The Minister will be aware that as long as this resolution is in force the courts cannot declare invalid any Act which is expressed to be for the purpose of securing the public safety and the preservation of the State. It would seem to me that after 29 years the question of rescinding this resolution should be fully considered.

I want to be quite frank with the Minister about this. In view of the statement I have read out here from the Garda Review article I would have some reservations about rescinding the emergency powers orders. If the Garda seriously considered that a situation was being forced in this country where communist infiltration might be taking place, then the existence of the orders might prove effective in combating infiltration of that sort. However, on the general grounds that this was a resolution passed at a time of emergency at the outbreak of the last war, 3rd September, 1939, it would seem appropriate now that the House should be given an opportunity of discussing the matter and seeing whether or not the resolution should be still kept in force.

I do not propose at this stage to say anything much about the proposed Criminal Justice Bill to which the Minister has referred. In relation to the Criminal Justice Bill the Minister said that he did not propose to say anything more about it than that there had been a great deal of misconception and misrepresentation as to the purposes and effects of some provisions of the Bill and which he hoped to dispel on Second Reading. I doubt if the Minister will be able to dispel people's doubts with regard to the appropriateness of some of the provisions of the Bill, particularly those dealing with restrictions on the right to hold public meetings without giving notice to the Gardaí and so on.

At this stage might I draw the attention of the Deputy to the fact that a discussion on this——

The Deputy's statement just now, strange to say, is a misconception.

That may be. I do not intend to discuss it and I started out by saying that I did not intend to discuss it but merely to make a passing reference to the Minister's remarks. It may be that there are misconceptions. Section 28 of the Offences Against the State Act is now being repealed and instead is being incorporated in the Criminal Justice Bill.

Without prejudice to the views I may express as to whether or not the powers which are now in section 28 of the Offences Against the State Act should be continued or not, I had set out to say that I think it is better that this kind of provision should be dealt with in ordinary legislation, as the Minister is doing in this particular instance, than that it should continue under an Act such as the Offences Against the State Act. We have had the experience of section 28 of that Act being operated when there were pickets outside this House and the feeling of the public at that time was that, whatever else might be said, there was no question of public safety or the safety of the State being involved. To that extent it is right that the Criminal Justice Bill should endeavour to deal with these matters. May I conclude by saying that this is the first Estimate the Minister has had to introduce as Minister for Justice and I know that he will not take it as personal when I say that it looks as if it may be his last.

I will start where Deputy Michael O'Higgins finished, that this is a new Department for the Minister and I congratulate him. Certainly, from the statement he made today, we can see that justice is being administered well. This is a particularly important Department because the law and order of the State depend on it. I was very impressed by the Minister's statement about juvenile delinquency. I was very pleased to see the great advances being made in this regard and the humane approach to this matter by all concerned with it, by the judges, the district justices, the Gardaí and so on, who are trying to deal with this problem, as well as the voluntary organisations who are playing an active part in this regard. It is up to us to express our appreciation of their wonderful work.

In my constituency the Gardaí have organised a boys' club in West Finglas. While I attend their annual general meetings, I do not have time to go there more often but I am very proud to see the wonderful work they are doing. Any Garda who has a particular leaning towards helping humanity as a whole should be commended by us and by the Department. We require more people like that and, while there may be other Gardaí who take a different view, there are Gardaí who are engaged in this work in helping the boys, even in trying to place them in employment afterwards and sometimes pleading for them if they are up before the courts for a first offence. I believe they are doing God's work and I hope they will continue to do so. This problem of juvenile delinquency is a very big problem and is one which confronts all churches, all bishops and archbishops and all are trying to do something about it. Even voluntary organisations such as the Society of St. Vincent de Paul have an interest in the well-being of our youth and we too must have sympathy and charity towards them.

I should like to appeal for the provision of more Gardaí at the County Dublin coastal resorts in the summertime. In certain areas in North Dublin we have had experiences of this rough and contrary element arriving at a resort and causing all sorts of mischief. The only thing that will prevent them from doing this is if they see a Garda on duty. I have made representations about this on many occasions, once to the present Minister and on other occasions to previous Ministers. I wonder if it would be possible to have a barracks opened in that area. It is a big area. In summer the population is trebled and every year it is increasing. Apart from the decent people who visit these resorts we have some undesirables who cause a good deal of trouble. I should like to thank the Minister for the co-operation I received from him last summer when he put a squad car at the disposal of the Lusk barracks in an effort to eliminate crime and various forms of trouble.

I should like also to congratulate Commissioner Weymes on his promotion. He is a very fine man and has earned his promotion. He is a very diplomatic person and I wish him well. The Minister has made a wise choice in appointing him. I should also like to pay a tribute to ex-Commissioner Carroll who was a particularly kind and efficient man. In my opinion, he is a man who displayed a deep sense of justice and charity in his dealings with all kinds of people and, in particular, in his dealings with the Gardaí under his control.

Our tourist trade grows yearly more and more important from the point of view of our balance of payments and I suggest to the Minister that the Gardaí should have special training to equip them to deal with tourists. I cast no reflection whatever on the Gardaí, but there is need for some training because these men are in a position to sell the country to the tourist, to sell it perhaps more effectively than even the hotel and guesthouse proprietor and it is from that point of view that I suggest some special training. I have not had any complaints, but there have been occasions on which tourists have inadvertently broken traffic regulations, perhaps by driving in the wrong direction up or down a one-way street. The Gardaí should be made aware of the importance of the tourist to the country as a whole. I shall not say any more on the subject.

People in north County Dublin, especially legal people, are disappointed because certain cases are no longer tried in the local district courts. This decision to transfer certain cases to city courts was not a decision of the Minister's. The legal profession and the litigants concerned would prefer that these cases should be tried in the local courts. I do not know all the pros and cons. I am sure the Minister will give me the reasons for the change when he comes to reply. A protest has been made to me and I am conveying it to the Minister.

The district court buildings continue to be eyesores. Some of them date back to the 17th and 18th century. They defeat the purpose of those towns which enter for the Tidy Towns competition. They are gloomy looking buildings. Surely something could be done to improve these buildings, internally and externally.

The Minister paid a tribute to district justices and judges who have taken on certain work outside the scope of their normal duties. They deserve commendation. I am sure this work will continue.

I pay tribute to the Minister and his Department for their courtesy and co-operation over the years.

I want to make a few brief remarks on a particular aspect of this Estimate, an aspect about which I spoke on the Estimate in 1966. Mountjoy Jail is in my constituency. I happen to be interested in conditions there. The men in the prison service have to some extent been ignored. There have been some improvements since 1966. As reported at column 1730 of volume 225 of the Official Report, I said to the Minister: "I want to get some assurance that the prison officers' conditions of work and overtime payments will be given priority treatment in the year ahead." I referred to conditions generally. As I say, there has been some improvement. There are still one or two problems that need to be resolved. We should consider seriously improving the status of the prison officer. In nearly every section of the public service there has been an improvement in status, but there has been no upgrading in the prison service. So far as I know, there is no official title by which to refer to these officers. There are Gaelic titles for most sections in the public service, but no fresh look has ever been taken at those who staff our prison service and, as I remarked two years ago, a fresh look is necessary at the conditions and the whole occupation of the men employed in the prison service. In relation to the Garda Síochána at Templemore, we have changed their curriculum somewhat. We appreciate that it is necessary to give them all a general training at the very start of their career in the Garda Síochána. I would say that to look after a person detained at the State's pleasure is as important as the job of the person who apprehends a person who has broken the law. I remember referring to this in 1966. The Minister agreed that there was an increasing complexity in the job of the prison officer; that refresher courses were needed at certain points and that he would need to learn certain elements of psychiatry and criminology. It is high time to introduce a general introductory training course for all new recruits into the service so as to shape this service in the way it should originally have been shaped and certainly in accordance with the agreed requirements.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.
Top
Share