asked the Minister for Justice if he will indicate the security precautions for the safe passage of the early morning mail train from Cork to Dublin; and if he will make a statement on the robbery from the train on 31st March last.
16.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Armed Robberies.
15.
asked the Minister for Justice the number of armed robberies in and around Dublin on Friday, 26th March, 1976; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 15 and 16 together.
I wish to protest, as much as I can, that the Minister wants to take both of those questions together. They are totally separate matters.
I am sure that, on reflection, the Deputy will appreciate that I could not possibly agree to give details of security precautions in relation to mail trains since to do so would be playing into the hands of criminal elements in our society. The matter is, and has for a considerable time been, the subject of constant consultation between the Garda and the interests concerned.
For the same reason, and also because, of course, the Garda Síochána are investigating the matter, I cannot undertake to make any detailed statement in regard to the particular train robbery referred to by the Deputy but I think it is only right to refer to one particular aspect of that case which I understand Deputy Collins has commented on publicly, and that is a report that an armed member of the Garda Síochána normally travelled on that train but was withdrawn on the occasion the robbery took place. That report was erroneous and was, in fact, promptly denied by the Garda Press Office.
As regards the armed robberies in the Dublin area on 26th March, the number reported to the Garda was four. Nobody has yet been charged with any of these four crimes but investigations are, of course, continuing.
In more general terms, I think it right to say that, in the context of a threat of armed raids, the protection of cash, whether it be in banks, offices or other places of that kind, or in transit by train or van or even by hand, presents problems that are very much more complex than are apparent on the surface. The amount of money that has to be moved from place to place in a modern economy, the frequency of such movements and the great variety of circumstances in which it has to be moved are such as to pose security problems of quite alarming dimensions. We could, quite literally, treble our present police force and still be very far from being able to guarantee protection against such raids.
Our society is based on certain unspoken assumptions, one of them being that armed criminals are not going about in such numbers or such manner as to cause a serious threat to the daily life of the country. If, for any reason, that assumption ceases to be valid, we as a community will have to face some very hard questions. Stringent laws would be unavoidable. The provision of armed guards at every vulnerable point, even if our society could afford it, would involve a basic change in the kind of society we have had. It would mean a large move away from the concept of the Garda Síochána being an unarmed force and, paradoxically, perhaps, would be liable to lead to an increase rather than a decrease in serious crimes of violence. It would also involve a large diversion of resources badly needed for other purposes.
I do not mean by this to imply that nothing can be or is being done in the short term to combat what is going on. The contrary is very much the case but I cannot, for obvious reasons, go into details. I have good hopes that what is being done will be successful but I think because of the amount of public worry and concern that exist that it would be wrong of me not to point out the difficulties and flag the legal changes that might have to be made but which we would prefer to avoid.
Arising out of the part of the Minister's reply which deals with Question No. 15, I would like him to say why there was not a garda on this particular train which was held up and how much was actually stolen during this raid?
I am not prepared to say why there was or was not a guard on any particular train because I would then be revealing details of security which must necessarily be kept confidential. I do not have the figure here for the actual amount stolen but I will communicate that to the Deputy.
Is the Minister aware that it is common knowledge at present that there was not a guard on the train and that every person in the country from the age of the use of reason upwards knows this to be a fact? Why has the Minister not got available to him the information with regard to the amount of money taken from the train? Can he further say if other trains carrying similar vast sums of money are unguarded at the present time? What would the actual cost be of paying two men to be on guard duty on a particular mail train, such as the one which was robbed?
I am not prepared to comment, as I said, on what trains have a guard and what trains have not. This would be getting into the realm of detail in the security area which would be undesirable. As I said in my reply to the question any such information would only be playing into the hands of criminal elements in our society. As to the cost of having an armed guard am I correct in presuming that the Deputy means an armed garda and not an armed civilian?
Yes.
The cost of having armed guards present would not be a factor in deciding whether or not they should be present. It would be a matter for the professional judgment of the Garda themselves. I have an amount here but I am not sure if it is the complete amount. I do not want to give it to the House until I am satisfied it is accurate. I will check it and I will send it to the Deputy.
The Minister is hiding behind the mantle of security in that he is not prepared to say certain things for security reasons. Is he aware that the bank robbers knew full well what the situation was and also that it is common gossip now? Everybody knows that since the robbery there has been a guard on the train, that prior to the cutback on Garda overtime by the Minister and the Government, there was a guard on the train.
Those statements are not correct so far as the information I have is concerned. I can only repeat that I am not prepared to say what trains are guarded and what trains are not guarded. As I said in the main reply to the question, there is a large amount of movement of cash throughout the country at frequent intervals. There is movement by various means, by road, by rail and by hand. We have in the country a number of determined criminals who have been affected by the cult of the gun which has spilled over from Northern Ireland. It is not a great matter for them to be able to make deductions as to where movements of cash are likely to take place. I repeat what I said to the House that should circumstances warrant it, should our society be changed in such a way that we can no longer make an assumption that we will be free of armed gangs roaming the country, then we will have to look at our entire legal and police positions. In the meantime certain measures are being taken which I hope will be successful in curtailing future raids. Should they be unsuccessful, I may have to come back to the House and make suggestions which nobody in my position or, indeed, nobody in the House would welcome. I hope it will not come to that. I hope that those who are engaged in these nefarious activities will realise the community will not tolerate their conduct.
Will the Minister say if it is a fact that armed guards travelled on board this mail train regularly up to the time the Minister and the Government decided to cut back on overtime for the Garda? Further, is the Minister aware that it would cost about £16 per man to put guards on this run because they come from Cork to Limerick Junction, they change at Limerick Junction and go on the southern bound train from Dublin, and those who come from Dublin to Limerick Junction return to Dublin? Is the Minister aware that everyone, and particularly those whose business it is to rob trains for whatever reason, is fully aware that since the introduction of the overtime ban on the Garda Síochána by the Minister and the Government only one man travels one night a week on this particular train?
I am not aware that the alleged facts put forward by the Deputy are correct. I would recommend to the Deputy, if he is getting information to that effect, to be aware of it because underhand information is never reliable.
If the Minister regards my information as underhand, let me refer him to those who are members of the Garda force. The Minister knows what I am talking about. With regard to Question No. 15, is the Minister aware that the morale of the Garda force is unbelievably low at the present time because they have been prohibited from doing their work efficiently and effectively by the Minister and by the Government? Will he state what he proposes to do about this?
I am not so aware. I am well aware that the morale of the Garda Síochána is higher now than it has been for a long time past because they have a clear and unequivocal mandate regarding what to do about subversives.
Arising out of what the Minister has said——
I have allowed the Deputy a considerable number of supplementary questions. I want to deal with other questions. This must be the Deputy's final supplementary question.
I do not want to start a row with the Chair. I will abide by the Chair's decision.
I have given the Deputy a lot of latitude. There is no question of a row; the Chair must be obeyed.
I find it difficult to understand why the Chair allowed eight supplementary questions on the school transport service from Carrigart to Umlagh on Question No. 13——
The Deputy has had a good innings on these two questions.
With regard to Question No. 16, will the Minister state what action, if any, he proposes to take to deal with the alarming and increasing number of bank robberies which take place regularly every Friday? Will he also state what he and the Government propose to do with regard to the alarming and increasing number of post office robberies throughout the country?
It is not correct to say that robberies take place regularly on Fridays.
Unfortunately it is correct.
This is a rash and uncalled for statement. I have said in my main reply that measures are being taken which I hope will be successful to counter these raids. I have already indicated that because of security considerations I cannot give details openly in this House about what is being done.
Will the Minister say if he would be prepared to recommend to the Government that money be made available to the Garda Síochána so that they may work overtime in an effort to combat the alarming increase in crime and violence?
It would be a very simplistic solution to say that an increase in Garda overtime would solve this. It is not the solution.
Let the men do the work.
Will the Minister state if he approves of the practice of consigning £200,000, £300,000 or £400,000 in an unguarded train at night? If he does not approve, will he bring it to an end forthwith?
Quite obviously I do not approve of it. I hope that steps will be taken—although I am not prepared to say what the steps will be— to ensure that adequate protection for the movement of money will be given in the future.
Is it not up to the Minister to stop this traffic?
I am calling the next question.
Is it not a matter for the Minister to decide that it will not be moved?
Order. I have called the next question.
It is unfortunate that the Minister is not prepared to deal with it. He cloaks it all up under the heading of security.
I have given Deputies a lot of latitude on this question. I have called Question No. 17.
In view of the Minister's attitude it is no wonder the country is in its present situation.
Because of the unsatisfactory nature of the Minister's replies in this area, I wish to give notice that I propose to raise the matter on the Adjournment, with the permission of the Chair.
I will communicate with the Deputy.