(Cavan) asked the Minister for Justice if he is aware that due to the interference by his Department in the day to day running of the taxing masters' offices in the Four Courts without any consultation with the taxing masters, the work of these offices has been completely disrupted and is at a standstill with consequent inconvenience to the legal profession and general public; if he will take steps to ensure that proper provision is made for the smooth running of these offices; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Taxing Masters' Offices.
24.
The Deputy is misinformed. The action taken in this matter was the taking-over of accommodation previously used by a taxingmaster because the accommodation was urgently needed for another purpose in the public interest, namely, the provision of a courtroom for the Circuit Court. This in turn was necessary because an additional Circuit Court judge had to be appointed to help to reduce the serious arrears that had accumulated in the Dublin circuit, especially in criminal cases, with resulting unfairness to accused persons and damage to the public interest.
It is asserted in the question that there was no consultation with the taxing masters. A similar assertion was made in certain newspaper reports. It is without foundation. There were discussions with the taxing masters several weeks previously and further discussions some ten days before action was taken. Efforts to secure agreement failed and clear and adequate notice was then given that the accommodation was needed and would have to be taken over. The proposal was that the taxing master directly concerned, who as the person longer in office would have a choice, should move into the accommodation being occupied by the other taxing master and that the latter would move elsewhere. It was only in relation to this latter accommodation that any question of suitability arose and then only in regard to its location and not its size or suitability in other respects. Offers made to discuss alternatives to what was offered and to discuss the mechanics of a change-over were completely rejected.
I do not accept that any court official has the right to remain on in a particular room which is urgently needed for an important public purpose especially when other accommodation, the suitability of which is not seriously at issue, is made available to him. If the Government are to be held responsible for the provision of accommodation, they have a corresponding right—indeed, it is not so much a right as a duty to the tax-payer — to see that available accommodation is rearranged where that is reasonably possible and where it meets a serious public need.
As regards the allegation that the work of the taxing master's office has been brought to a standstill, my information is that the work is now proceeding again.
(Cavan): Is the Minister aware that the taxing masters, who are judicial or quasijudicial officials, and who are appointed by the Government and discharge their duties under the general supervision of the Chief Justice, were consulted on 9th November about the possibility of re-arranging their accommodation by a senior official of the Minister's Department, that no agreement was reached on that day, that the matter was left completely in mid-air and that nothing further was heard by these judicial officers until 22nd November when they reported for duty and the senior taxing master found his office crudely but permanently barricaded with timber nailed across the door? On consulting the Chief Justice on that day they were instructed not to continue to discharge their duties until proper facilities were made available to them. Will the Minister agree that there were no real consultations? If this is the type of consultation that goes on between officers of the Minister's Department and other bodies, including the Garda Síochána, it is no wonder that we have chaos in the Garda Síochána and in other bodies operating under the Minister's Department.
What the Deputy says is not correct. There were consultations.
Is the Minister also aware that the senior taxing master concerned not only found his courtroom barred by a lath of wood but that he also found that his personal effects and papers had been removed from his private office to another room? He found a freshly painted arrow indicating to him and others that his accommodation had been changed. Is this the kind of bureaucratic muscle-men treatment that the courts are to get from the Minister's Department? Just because a senior civil servant did not get his way he apparently ordered a group of workmen to go in over the week-end and physically bar entrance to the court of the taxing master concerned, and physically remove his personal effects and chattels to another room.
I cannot accept what the Deputy has said.
I can assure the Minister that that is what happened.
First of all, in reply to Deputy Fitzpatrick, there was consultation with the men concerned three or four weeks before this move took place. There was consultation again with them about ten day before it took place and they were asked to discuss the mechanics of the change but unfortunately——
Is it not a fact that they were offered a bribe and refused to accept it?
The offer to discuss it was rejected completely. There was no question of my officials ordering anybody to put timber boards, or whatever it was, on doors. A contractor was brought in by the Office of Public Works to do certain very urgent work in that room. The contractor, presumably in order to allow himself and his men freedom to work there, closed up the room in whatever way he thought fit.
(Cavan): Would the Minister not agree that if an ordinary citizen did what his Department did, he would turn the Forcible Entry Act on them?
Hear, hear.
My Department did not do anything of the kind that is alleged.
(Interruptions.)
Order. Question No. 25.
Do I understand the Minister to say to the House that I was incorrect in saying that the personal effects of the senior taxing master had been removed from his room and put elsewhere and that I have been incorrect in saying that his court was barred by a wooden lath?
The papers and other effects that were in one of these rooms were moved to an adjoining room.
(Cavan): But the locks were changed.
The locks were changed so that the taxing master who had a set of master keys could not get into his room.
That is not true. He was told that this change-over would have to take place.
Neither the officials nor the public concerned received any notice of this change.
That is not true. There were consultations beforehand.
Deputy T.J. Fitzpatrick (Cavan) rose.
We cannot debate this question all evening. The Deputy has had three supplementaries already.
(Cavan): I am not seeking to debate it.
It is turning into a debate.
(Cavan): I merely want to give notice that in view of the serious principle involved, I propose to raise the matter on the Adjournment.
The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.