asked the Minister for Justice if the Garda authorities will take action under the Forcible Entry and Occupation Act, 1971, against itinerants and roadside traders in order to protect the rights and property of the settled community.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Itinerants and Roadside Traders.
15.
I am afraid that I do not see the connection between the provisions of the 1971 Act and roadside trading but, in any event, it is certainly not my intention to make any suggestions to the Garda Síochána on the lines of the question.
Is the Minister aware that most of the itinerants and roadside traders are on local authority property, areas left vacant following road improvement or land acquired for housing purposes? As the Minister is aware, these areas are used by itinerants and roadside traders to the detriment of local traders and of people living in the area.
The question relates to the Forcible Entry and Occupation Act and that Act does not apply in the situation outlined by the Deputy.
Surely it is relevant if the land occupied by the itinerants is in private or public ownership. Surely the Garda can use their powers to move people on.
The Act does not apply to that sort of situation. The ordinary law of trespass applies and local authorities have power under the Sanitary Services Act to make an order prohibiting temporary dwellings and local authorities can prosecute people in breach of that law.
The Minister is aware that fines under the Health Acts and other Acts are antiquated. A fine of £5 is nonsense in this year of 1976. Would he not consider amending the Acts?
If these Acts are to be amended that is a matter for the Minister for Local Government.
Would the Minister consider extending the scope of the Forcible Entry and Occupation Act in order to provide some protection for the settled community and for legitimate traders who have to pay rates, taxes, VAT, salaries and so on? They are suffering unfair competition because of the activities of these roadside traders. There is also the danger of wandering horses belonging to itinerants staying on these lands which are in public ownership.
I sympathise with people who are annoyed or who have to suffer unfair competition from roadside traders. It might be a good thing if the law were strengthened to deal with that but it is a matter for the Minister for Local Government. A prohibition under the Forcible Entry and Occupation Act would not be a suitable vehicle to deal with the problem. Wandering horses would be in a different category from roadside traders. They would be a social and therefore, a community matter.
The local authority in which I am involved in County Dublin have made accommodation available for itinerants, as have Dublin Corporation, but the itinerants will not move. It is practically impossible to get them to move under present legislation and surely in a case like that the Minister could use the Forcible Entry and Occupation Act.
No. It would not apply to that sort of situation. I can only speak here in general terms. If there were a particular case in which the Act did apply and representations were made to the Garda, no doubt they would move, but it would have to be a specific instance. The Act does not apply in general terms to a general number of situations.
Is the Minister aware that the attitude of the courts with regard to roadside trading is very much at variance with that of the Garda and does he not agree that, if the good work of the Garda is not matched by the courts, then that good work is set at naught?
This is a widening of the subject matter of the question.
I cannot comment on what the courts do. They are independent in their operations.