Vol. 317 No. 1
asked the Taoiseach whether he will state the official practice in determining the matters which fall within the Attorney General's function in regard to the representation of the public in all legal proceedings for the enforcement of law and the assertion of public rights.
2.
asked the Taoiseach whether the Attorney General retains a residual function even in cases where a particular enforcement function, other than that of bringing prosecutions, has been conferred by law on other authorities.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together.
The question whether a particular function is conferred by law on the Attorney General or on some other authority, or on both, is a question of law, subject to the Constitution, to be determined in each case.
In matters in which the Attorney General has a discretion under the Constitution and the law it is not the official practice to direct him as to how such discretion should be exercised. As a constitutional officer he exercises his discretion independently of Government. He presents the views of the State or the Government when he represents either.
The Minister may realise that this is what I was originally trying to get at: is he aware that there are and have been over the years very widespread and persistent complaints that the planning law has not been observed and that planning conditions have not been observed by builders all over the country where there are new housing schemes, and that this is particularly bad in south County Dublin? Would he not consider that since the enforcement——
The Deputy should ask a question.
This is my first supplementary question and no one has lost his temper yet except the Chair. Could the Minister tell me whether the Attorney General would consider that the enforcement mechanism which the law provides in the planning statutes has shown itself totally inadequate to ensure that the law is enforced; and whether the Attorney General would then consider reviewing his own powers to see whether there was some procedure appropriate to himself for making sure that those laws are respected by the people who benefit from them?
The question which has been put here is a question on the general principles and I have answered in that respect. If the Deputy wishes to put down a more specific question certainly I would be glad to get the appropriate answer. He may be thinking in terms of related actions and these of course are currently sub judice in that there is a case before the High Court which relates to this. If the Deputy would like to put down a specific question I would be glad to get the answer for him.
Would the Minister of State accept from me—and he can check up on it if he likes—that I did in fact put down a specific question on this point and was told that it would be given to the Minister for the Environment to reply to? In other words, it would be given to a Minister who has no responsibility for the Attorney General. The reason I put the question in this general form, which I quite agree is unsatisfactory from the point of view of the Minister of State, is because his own Department tried to get rid of it, which is the usual practice in his Department.
If such a question is appropriately framed I do not think the Deputy will have any difficulty in getting an answer.
May I take that as an undertaking, that if I frame a question specifically devoted to discovering whether the Attorney General will try to enforce the planning law, whatever the responsibility of the Minister for the Environment may be, it would be taken by the Taoiseach or by his Minister of State?
If it is appropriately phrased it will be taken by the Taoiseach or by his Minister of State.
Question No. 3 has been postponed.
