Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Friday, 9 Jul 1982

Vol. 337 No. 8

Estimates, 1982 (Resumed). - Vote 22: Office of the Minister for Justice (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:
That a sum not exceeding £11,580,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 1982, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for Justice, and of certain other services administered by that Office, and of the Public Record Office, and of the Keeper of State Papers and for the purchase of historical documents, etc., and for payment of a grant-in-aid.
—(Minister for Justice.)

As a relative newcomer to this House, having been here 12 months now, I deplore the fact that this Estimate will, effectively, finish at 4 o'clock this afternoon. It is not the Minister's fault and I am not blaming him. But we are talking about what I would regard as one of the major Departments of State with enormous functions from security to law reform. We are talking about a Department the Estimate for which is in excess of £241 million. In addition to the Minister speaking there will be no more than two or three other Deputies in the House contributing to the debate on the Estimate for this Department. I deplore that fact.

The manner in which we are dealing with Estimates in this House requires urgent re-examination. I know I am echoing the sentiments of predecessors of mine in this House from all parties. We have now reached the stage where we are turning this House into an irrelevancy. We have inherited the Westminster model of parliament without seeing fit to even introduce the reforms that have been introduced into that model over the years. The time limits on the Estimates debate of the Department of Justice is a very real indicator of the inept and peculiar manner in which we deal with enormous sums of the public finances.

I would regard an Estimate debate as effectively having two principal functions. First, it gives the Minister an opportunity to tell the House how much expenditure will be incurred in various sections of his Department over the year. It also gives the Minister an opportunity to indicate to the House what new steps he intends taking or what the policies will be within his Department, in particular, in the context of the Department of Justice, what areas of reform, be they legislative reforms or administrative reforms, are within the responsibility of that Minister that will be dealt with in the year. It is the only time in the year that this House is given an opportunity of discussing in general the policies that we would like to see a Minister implementing in his Department. In the context of the Department of Justice it is the only opportunity we get to discuss general policy matters in relation to the Garda, in relation to the courts, in relation to our prison system, in relation to law reforms. The only other times at which we can raise these issues is either by specific Dáil Question or when particular legislation comes before the House, and then of course the debate is confined to the legislation.

Because of the limited time I have at my disposal as spokesman on law reform for Fine Gael I want to confine my remarks to that area, in that area the Minister's speech is more remarkable for its omissions than for its substantive content. I was extremely disappointed with the speech delivered by the Minister on the Estimates debate. It contains no indication of any nature of any areas of reform that the Minister intends to introduce in the coming year. We have heard promises, and comments have been made about different legislation some of which has been commented on by the Minister outside this House. But we have had no specific proposals brought by the Minister before this House that within the next 12 months we are going to enact legislation in particular areas and introduce reforms in particular areas.

In the area of law reform a vast amount of work has to be done. I apreciate and understand that the Minister may have some difficulties in this area because he is responsible for the enormous area covered by the Department of Justice. Indeed, in recent years the security area, for very obvious reasons, has been a matter of major concern to all Ministers. The area of law reform is of grave concern to many people and our failure to reform whole series of laws is adding a great deal to unhappiness and misery and creating tremendous problems for the future which are eventually going to have to be tackled by this House.

The Minister's difficulty in dealing with this area is compounded by the failure of the Taoiseach to appoint a Minister of State with responsibility for law reform, a responsibility that the present Minister for Justice had in a previous Fianna Fáil administration. The failure to appoint a Minister for law reform is indicative of the failure of the Government and of Fianna Fáil to fully appreciate and understand the need for and importance of reforming vast areas of our law.

What areas need reforming? Under the Whips' agreement I understand I have approximately five minutes to cover them. What areas require reform that are not referred to at any stage in his speech by the Minister? There is the whole area of illegitimacy, the concept of children being discriminated against because of the circumstances of their birth, and the way we regard one child as inferior to another and discriminate against that child in a whole series of ways within our legal system. Reform of this area of law is long overdue.

The Irish Commission for Justice and Peace in a recent statement on this matter said that there is a general obligation in justice for everyone, including Christians, that no one should be stigmatised and made to feel inferior because of the circumstances of their birth, for which they carry no responsibility. In response to that statement the Minister made a comment outside this House, which he subsequently repeated in reply to a Dáil question, to the effect that in general he accepts that the law in relation to illegitimacy should be reformed. If that is the case why has he not stated that legislation will be introduced in this area and why has he not promised a Bill before the end of this year? The reason is that, as in other areas of law reform, this ministerial responsibility has been abdicated to the Law Reform Commission. The buck has been passed to them and as yet they have been unable to come up with any specific proposals.

Then there is the problem in relation to the law of nullity. Many hundreds of couples have obtained Church decrees of annulment and in the context of their religious beliefs they no longer regard themselves as married. A number of them have since remarried in the Church. There is an enormous discrepancy between the number of Church annulments and the number of civil annulments. In the period 1976-1980 there were 462 decrees of annulment granted by the marriage tribunals of the Roman Catholic Church while in the same period there were only 17 civil decrees granted. We have no proposals for law reform in this area. Why is this the case? The answer is that the Law Reform Commission are examining the issue. Again political responsibility has been abdicated.

It is interesting to note that in the first report produced by the Law Reform Commission in 1976 they stated that they felt there was no reason for them to report on the law of nullity because the Attorney General's Office had done so in some detail. We now note that the Attorney General's report has been referred to the commission for another report. The commission say they have difficulties regarding what should be done because the decisions now required are of a political nature. These are decisions which the Law Reform Commission cannot make and are not statutorily required to make. We are not merely talking about lawyers' law in this area but the need to decide what type of reform is necessary.

The Minister's speech does not contain a specific reference or suggestion regarding the reform of our courts system. The only reference made is to the fact that the Minister's Department have obtained additional buildings in order to provide a certain number of new district courts or circuit courts. There is no suggestion in relation to the family law area that the Minister might even be considering the provision of family courts so that we could have a coherent and unified court system dealing with family problems instead of the disparate, overlapping and sometimes contradictory jurisdictions we have at present. Why has the Minister not proposed family courts? It was suggested by Fianna Fáil during successive elections that they were in favour of family courts, yet it appears there is no intention to introduce the necessary legislation.

It was even more depressing to hear the one comment in the Minister's speech in regard to the Children's Court system. The Children's Court in Dublin Castle was criticised for many years as a facility which should be replaced by a very different form of court. The Minister's only comment was that due to the fact that a portion of the building in Dublin Castle was condemned, the Children's Court had to be moved to Morgan Place and will be moving to a different building in the not-too-distant future.

It is depressing that the Minister's speech does not contain any reference to the Task Force on Child Care Services whose report contained comprehensive recommendations not merely for changing children's law in the area of taking children into care but in relation to the whole sphere of juvenile justice. There were suggestions in the minority report for the introduction of a different form of court system and in the majority report there were concrete recommendations for the introduction of a number of changes in children's law generally. I do not understand why the Minister's speech did not contain a reference to this Report.

It is my understanding that the Minister for Health intends to introduce legislation to implement some portions of the report in a Children's Bill. Will that Bill deal with the whole area of juvenile justice and the criminal responsibility of children? Will it provide a new form of court structure to deal with children both who need to be taken into care and who come before our courts? Is it intended that this Bill will be introduced solely under the auspices of the Department of Health or have there been discussions and consultations between the Department of Justice and the Department of Health as to what is to be contained in this Bill?

On a point of order, by agreement with the Whips each speaker is entitled to ten minutes and I wish to speak on this Bill.

I apologise. Perhaps the Deputy would allow me to ask the Minister one question. The Minister might be in a position to tell the House what is happening in relation to the strike by District Court clerks. I hope he will not hide behind the defence that this matter is sub judice, which it is not, vis-à-vis the Minister's Department. The continuation of this strike is now causing severe distress and hardship to a large number of women who need to seek assistance from our courts in looking for both maintenance orders and barring orders. I had hoped that the Minister would use the opportunity presented by this debate to indicate what steps he is taking to solve the dispute and whether it is likely to be solved within the next couple of weeks. I hope the Minister will provide the House with an explanation as to why on 13 May 1982 he indicated that the dispute was settled when, in fact, it was not.

The importance of the preservation of the family unit is now more evident than ever. We must take an honest look at what has been allowed to happen over the years. The predominance of outside influences is very evident in our society and the modern trend is to a large degree taking over. In many areas traditions are dying fast and outside influences are being allowed to take over. Television, which I would describe as the modern day evil, advocates drug pushing and violence and these have crept into society. The drug pushers must be flushed out and crime pockets must be eliminated.

I welcome the Minister's crime prevention campaign. It is necessary and expresses a concern about crime and vandalism. It stresses the need for a contribution by the people in co-operation with the Garda. This will make a significant contribution to crime prevention in our homes and on the streets. The Minister has brought a new dimension to law enforcement and I congratulate him.

I also congratulate the Minister on the Garda recruitment campaign. The recruitment rate has been accelerated. An extra 200 gardaí have been accommodated in prefab buildings in the training centre and there is extra rented accommodation in Thurles. There are 200 recruits over and above the 300 maximum capacity of Templemore Training School. Accommodation for a total of 500 gardaí has been provided and by the end of the year there will be an extra 1,000 gardaí appointed. This recruitment campaign has been well backed up by the Minister for Finance with the contribution of £2½ million for the recruitment of equipment of extra gardaí. It is the Minister's intention to keep the training centre filled to maximum capacity.

Gardaí on the beat are more in evidence than ever before. Last Tuesday night I walked through the streets of Dublin with my wife and felt a sense of security which I have not felt for many a day due to their presence on our streets in Dublin. They are making a significant contribution towards crime prevention in Dublin and elsewhere. I have now overstepped my time, but will communicate with the Minister on other matters with which I have not had time to deal.

Could I ask the Minister to give me about two minutes? I will probably take less.

I will give you two minutes if the Minister for Justice does not mind.

I do not mind.

This is an Estimate for the Department of Justice. However, I wish to place on record that justice in this country has broken down completely. People are being molested, raped, robbed, motor cars smashed and stolen and this House takes so little notice that there appears to be a party conspiracy to prevent free and deliberate debate on these important issues. This is perhaps one of the most dangerous steps which political parties can take. We must speak out loudly and strongly to put an end to this state of affairs.

The Deputy has less than one minute left.

I sympathise with the Minister on this. I am sure there is nobody more enthusiastic than he to act quickly in this situation before matters get completely out of hand. The Minister knows what happened recently in Finglas.

The Deputy has gone over his time. He is taking up the Minister's time, which was so generously given.

The situation is so serious that vigilante groups are being set up. That will lead to the same situation in Dublin as presently prevails in the Six Counties. I beg of every Member to prevent that from happening. The Association of Garda Sergeants and Inspectors made a statement in reply to a criticism of mine in the Dáil.

The Deputy has gone over his time.

I am satisfied that the Minister is inquiring into that matter. It would be a serious state of affairs if there were no garda sergeants in the country.

On a point of order——

It would be a most serious situation if we had no garda sergeants.

Deputy Lynch, on a point of order.

I hope the Deputy is not trying to criticise the Minister, especially in the light of his endeavours in regard to crime prevention.

I appeal to Deputy Flanagan to finish.

I want the assistance of the Chair so that what is happening in this House does not continue to happen.

Thank you, Deputy Flanagan.

There must be free debate and expression of opinion on the subject of people being beaten up and robbed.

Thank you, Deputy. The Minister to reply now.

I would always be delighted to bow to the seniority of Deputy Flanagan. Firstly, I take the opportunity, in the few brief moments available to me, to congratulate Deputy Shatter on his appointment as spokesman on law reform. I assure the House that I and my Government are committed to law reform as was evident during the time when I was Minister of State. At that time, a considerable amount of legislation in the law reform area was put through the House by me and I got considerable co-operation from the Opposition Deputies.

I refer to the points specifically relating to the questions of nullity and illegitimacy raised by Deputy Shatter. I notice that the Deputy did not refer to the question of domicile. As he knows all these are sensitive, delicate and complex matters. I am satisfied that it would be incorrect and, indeed, inappropriate of me to duplicate the difficult work being pursued by the Law Reform Commission. Regardless of what has often been said about this commission, it has been of considerable practical use to this House and to Governments in the past. The Attorney General who referred a number of questions to the Law Reform Commission did so in the knowledge of the serious complexities which were attached to them. For that reason, I am prepared to wait and am anxious and hopeful that the Law Reform Commission will produce as quickly as possible their final documents in all the areas referred to them.

In connection with the difficulties in our courts system at the moment, Deputy Shatter has expressed concern about that situation on more than one occasion. At no time have I attempted, or in any shape or form used any mechanism, to hide myself away in any part of this House from the realities that face me in regard to the courts dispute. The one thing which I am not going to do — and I want to put myself on record in this House on this — is capitulate to any single grouping of people, legitimately set up or otherwise. Many difficult problems face many different people and the democracy to be protected by us in this House is not such as will respond to pressure groups making extraordinary demands. I am not describing the union involved as a pressure group, but demands which are not capable of being met cannot be accepted and will not be tolerated by me.

At the same time I accept the very serious situation which this dispute has posed for so many, particularly women and children. I am appealing to the people involved to use the mechanisms which are there to resolve this dispute, recognising that the State has not unlimited cash. Certainly, I would like to do so many other things if the money were available. I cannot capitulate and must honestly express myself in this regard.

On a point of order, I am very loath to interrupt the Minister and I appreciate his replying to the matter but, on a point of order, is the Minister seriously ——

I do not think that it is fair that I should be asked to forego the few moments left to me.

Does the Minister seriously consider that the District Court clerks are threatening democracy?

The Deputy knows very well what I am saying. He comes along and makes that remark and looks to the press gallery as if it is from that area that he will obtain political solace for the future. That is unfair. He knows the position as well as I do. There are a number of legal changes which I will bring about. The Criminal Justice Bill has been referred to and this will be introduced in this House. I will introduce a Liquor Licensing Bill and a Gaming and Lotteries Bill. I have already had circulated a Community Service Bill. The Deputy smiles at that. He has good reason to smile.

Cabinteely.

Over the last few months, I have provided a number of additional welfare officers to the Department of Justice, and assistance and technical expertise by way of scientists and technicians in the laboratory run by Dr. Donovan, who suffered so tragically in recent times. I have made progress on garda recruitment, on crime prevention, on additional equipment including radio equipment, on computerisation. All these are being done in very difficult times. We all have a co-operative part to play in this and we must become more law assisting.

I understand the concern expressed by Deputy Flanagan about vigilante groups and similar activities. I do not wish to see that type of situation develop here. I want to ensure that the Garda and the public will have confidence in each other. In many instances, I still find keys left in cars and keys left in doors of houses in Dublin. People must take simple precautions to ensure at least the minimum protection.

I do not want to be political about this. I have been three and a half to four months as Minister for Justice. While a considerable amount of work has been done, there is much more to come. I hope that the Deputies in the Opposition benches, particularly Deputy Shatter, will contribute and give me assistance, rather than try to attempt to score political points. The people who will suffer most will be ourselves and the general public whom we represent. We will not be treated seriously if we are seen to be in this House purely for the purpose of scoring political points off each other.

The Minister has little to learn about scoring points.

Vote put and agreed to.
Top
Share