I move:
That the Bill be now read a Second Time.
The sole purpose of this short Bill is to extend for a further period the provisions of section 2 of the Prisons Act, 1972, which provides for the transfer of prisoners from the civil prisons to military custody. When I sought the first extension of the Prisons Act, 1972, three years ago, I stated that the main reason for seeking it was to permit the continued separation from the civil prison system of prisoners who promoted or actively engaged in seriously disruptive activities. It is still necessary to separate a small number of prisoners from the civil prison system if relative peace and calm is to be maintained in the civil prisons and so enable rehabilitative work to proceed without hindrance.
Three years ago I stated that this problem could be solved by building a special high security prison unit capable of housing up to 30 high risk prisoners. Preliminary planning work had started on this unit and it was intended to build it in the Portlaoise prison complex. For security reasons it has been found impossible to commence the work. Portlaoise prison has since then accommodated the main groups of subversive prisoners and they have amply demonstrated in the intervening period that they will use every means, including violence and intimidation of security personnel, to undermine security at the prison and escape if possible.
In August, 1974, the prisoners used explosives recklessly to breach the perimeter security, and 19 of their number escaped. In December, 1974, they took hostage a number of prison officers and proceeded to wreck fixtures and fittings in the prison. In March, 1975, explosives were again used by the prisoners to blow their way out of the recreation hall and yard. This escape attempt was co-ordinated with an attack on the prison from outside during which a heavily armoured truck was used to attempt to smash a way through to the prison. During the firing which occurred a prisoner lost his life. In July, 1976, an attempt was made to burn down the prison by setting fire to bedding and cell furniture. There have been numerous other incidents in the prison, with persistent defiance of the prison authorities, culminating in a hunger strike. In this situation it was quite impossible to contemplate starting major construction work in the prison with all the hazards this would entail for the security of the prison. Apart from the presence of building material, equipment and machinery, and the movement in and out of building material, there was the very real danger of workmen being intimidated.
As a matter of fact, the site for the special unit has had to be given over temporarily to accommodate military personnel stationed in the prison. The House will agree, I am sure, that if the security situation requires the continuous presence of substantial number of soldiers, reasonable accommodation must be provided for them. The only available suitable site for that purpose was the one proposed for the special unit. There is no other suitable location in the civil prison system for this special unit. None of the existing buildings would suit.
Mountjoy prison remains the largest prison. It accommodates about 400 prisoners and is the main committal prison. Mountjoy is an old prison and requires extensive reconstruction and development to meet present day needs. The work of reconstruction has been proceeding steadily. A new plant house has been built outside the prison walls and this is intended to serve the power needs of the whole North Circular Road complex. Fully modern staff quarters have been built just outside the prison wall and these will be opened in a short time. Space for development is at a premium in the grounds and there is no possibility of providing a site there for a high security unit. Allocating a section or wing of the existing prison for this purpose would not be an acceptable solution.
The new training unit, which is of course completely separate from Mountjoy Prison, both physically and administratively, is now in operation and some specialist industrial training for prisoners has commenced. The rate of activity will increase gradually and by the end of this year I expect that it will be fully operational. It has accommodation for 96 prisoners in what I would describe as a very open setting inside the perimeter walls.
Limerick prison is the committal prison for the south-west. It accommodates some 100 male prisoners and, in a separate section, some ten female prisoners. It is also a very old building which will require extensive reconstruction and renovation to meet present day needs. There is little space available in it for new development, but what there is available is needed for ordinary rehabilitative facilities for prisoners. An old administration block in now being renovated to provide educational class-rooms and there are plans to build a prefabricated structure on another site for workshops. A small site has been acquired at the rear of the prison for further development of work training/educational facilities.
The reconstruction of Cork prison is proceeding. It has not been possible, because of the pressure on prison accommodation generally, to vacate the prison and so allow the reconstruction work to proceed without hindrance. Some 40 prisoners are accommodated there at present and it may be up to two years yet before the work is fully completed. There is no space available for the high security unit.
Arbour Hill prison has been completely modernised and accommodates some 60 long-term prisoners. Further development work is proceeding. The staff quarters adjoining the prison are near completion and work will commence shortly on a new building which will augment the work/training and educational facilities for prisoners. Already a number of well-equipped workshops are in operation in the prison, including ones for printing, joinery and braille. The braille unit is a particularly noteworthy development, the idea being to produce educational material for the unsighted, material which would not otherwise be available to them.
I mentioned three years ago that I intended to allocate Arbour Hill prison to remand prisoners but after re-examining the matter I decided that it should be allocated instead to long-term prisoners who need a good standard of accommodation and good facilities to make their stay in prison tolerable. Although there has to be a measure of security at Arbour Hill, it cannot for a number of reasons, including its location and layout, be regarded as a high security prison.
Portlaoise prison is allocated entirely to prisoners who have been charged with or convicted of subversive type offences. The population at present is fairly steady at about 150. As I have said already, there is no scope there for major development work for security reasons. The remaining place of detention for male adult prisoners is Shelton Abbey, County Wicklow. It accommodates 15 to 20 prisoners and this figure can be increased to some 40 as soon as work and educational facilities can be developed.
Female prisoners are accommodated in both Mountjoy and Limerick prisons. While it is likely that Limerick prison will have to continue to be used to accommodate female prisoners either charged with or convicted of subversive-type offences, because it is the only place where a reasonable degree of security can be provided for them, I am more than anxious to see the new prison proposed on the site at Kilbarrack started. The diversion of scarce resources to other areas, not least in providing the necessary degree of security at Portlaoise prison, has meant the postponment of this project. The planning work is, however, proceeding and I hope it will be possible to start the building work fairly soon.
There are three places of detention for male juveniles, that is, St. Patrick's Institution, which is a closed place of detention, and the two open centres at Shanganagh Castle and Loughhan House. St. Patrick's Institution accommodates some 175 boys between the ages of 16 and 21. It has a very good educational unit and recreational facilities are reasonably good. Some work is about to commence to improve work facilities but I confess that I will not be satisfied with the provision for closed custody for juveniles until St. Patrick's can be replaced altogether with two entirely new places—one in Dublin and one in Cork. When that happens, it will be possible to use St. Patrick's to take some prisoners from Mountjoy prison to ease the pressure of accommodation there and also to enable the reconstruction work there to proceed. In the long term the space at St. Patrick's is needed to provide extra rehabilitative facilities for prisoners in the North Circular Road complex. There is no space available there for a high security unit. The layout and location of the site is not, in any event, suitable for that purpose.
The two open centres are operating very satisfactorily, providing excellent accommodation and work/educational facilities for the 60 or so boys accommodated there. With further development both these places will continue to play a key role in the rehabilitative programme for juvenile offenders.
I should mention at this point that I have authorised the creation of a number of additional welfare officer posts for the purpose of enabling a substantial proportion of juveniles serving sentences in St. Patrick's to be released into the community under intensive supervision. The scheme will commence as soon as the necessary staff have been recruited. I look forward to the results of this unique departure in the rehabilitative field.
The improvements in rehabilitative facilities for prisoners are, as I said at the beginning, proceeding rapidly. They cannot be continued unless there is reasonable peace and calm in the prisons. Those small number of prisoners who are disruptive cannot be allowed to stand in the way of improvements for all prisoners and they must continue to be separated out of the ordinary prisoners. The long-term solution to the problem is to build a highly secure prison unit for them but at the moment this is not possible. There is no alternative, therefore, but to continue to hold them in military custody in the military detention barracks, Curragh Training Camp. The average number so accomodated in the past three years has been around 30 and this is the number for which the accommodation continues to be needed. I am asking that the provision for military custody should continue for another three years in the hope that it will be possible in that time to find a long-term alternative to it.
A further reason for maintaining military custody has emerged in the last year or so, and this is the need to transfer subversive type prisoners who need hospital treatment to the General Military Hospital, Curragh Camp. Subversive type prisoners like those accommodated in Portlaoise prison are prepared, as I said before, to use every possible means to effect their escape, and their supporters and sympathisers are likewise prepared to take any steps to rescue them. Of necessity, ordinary hospitals are places where it is very difficult to ensure safe custody. The General Military Hospital has obvious advantages from this point of view and there is no alternative to continuing to use it for prisoners who require hospitalisation but who, at the same time, present serious security risks.
As I have said before, military custody for civilian prisoners is not something which I like and if there were a reasonable alternative I would gladly accept it. I should hasten to add, that my misgivings relate to the principle involved and nothing else. I know the military authorities do everything in their power to have conditions for the prisoners as humane as possible and as close as possible to those available in the ordinary prisons.
At this point I would like to pay a special tribute to the Defence Forces and especially those in the Military Police Corps, who have done so remarkably well in coping with this difficult problem both in the detention barracks and the General Military Hospital. I recognise that this work represents a great burden on them and it is to the credit of the Defence Forces that they have done it so well.
To sum up, the Bill merely seeks to extend for a further limited period the temporary Prisons Act introduced by my predecessor. The constraints which inspired the original Act are unfortunately still with us and I am sure all sides share my regret that this should be so. I am sure too that all sides will join with me in expressing the hope that circumstances will so improve during the currency of this Bill that a further renewal in three years' time will be unnecessary.