(Limerick East): I should like to thank Deputies for their constructive contributions to this debate. Their comments will be fully considered in the context of policy and in relation to the day-to-day operation of the work and services provided for in the Votes we have been debating. Certainly I shall take on board the constructive points made by many Deputies of all parties here.
It is a coincidence that I have been on Question Time for the last four days and that my Department's Estimate debate should occur now. In effect, most of the points that have been raised have already been dealt with in the very large number of questions to which I have replied over the last four days. I shall not go over the same ground again simply to fill in time.
I think the House is aware that my principal responsibilities are in the area of the Garda Síochána, the prisons and the courts but I also have responsibility for legislation. Deputies are aware of the commitments I have given on legislation, the legislation which has been passed and the state of Bills before the House.
I should like to comment briefly on crime prevention and then to go on to take up individual points made by Deputies. Finally, I should like to give an initial response to the very serious matter raised by Deputy Haughey this afternoon.
I have been saying for some time that we should concentrate more of our resources on crime prevention. In this respect I have used a simple enough argument but I think it is one with which most of the public would agree. Once a crime is committed there is an injured party, there is a victim, there is a car stolen, there is a house burgled. All the concentration of the resources of the State are then invoked to bring the offender to justice. The Garda are called to the scene, they investigate it, if their investigation is successful they prepare the book of evidence which is sent to the Director of Public Prosecutions, he issues proceedings, when the matter is taken to court, through the courts — there may be free legal aid or not — and eventually somebody goes to prison.
In the whole process of criminal law there are two things that are very striking and which are common to all offences. First, there is an injured party and there is a victim. Little can be done by the process of bringing the offender to justice to compensate the victim. Second, all the initiatives of the criminal justice system take place at very substantial cost to the taxpayer. Deputies will be aware from the global figure of the Department and from individual Votes that the Garda cost money, the courts cost money and the prisons cost money, a lot of money, and it is the taxpayers who must pay. If we could concentrate more of our resources on crime prevention we would have no victim, no injured party and we would not have the costly process of the criminal justice system. That is why I would like to advocate again in the House that communities, especially in urban areas, get involved in the new neighbourhood watch scheme which has been launched nationwide. I should like all of us to support the Garda Commissioner in his initiative in this crime prevention area.
There is tremendous merit in crime prevention. It is particularly effective and has been found to be so in dealing with the type of crime which is causing us most concern at present. For example, problems of attacks on old people in the west. The best method of dealing with that is that neighbours would look after neighbours, people would be aware of strangers in their locality, that there would be a system whereby there would be neighbourly community checks on old people to ensure that they are safe, that there would be a contact system built up through scattered rural areas where people live in isolated places. That will prevent it. This would be the case also in urban areas, where one of the main problems is that of larceny and burglary. There are certain houses which are more vulnerable than others. It is a matter of general knowledge now that if two people are out working their house is more vulnerable to a burglar during the day than if there were somebody at home. If somebody is living alone and he or she goes out, that house is more vulnerable to burglary. Houses in suburban areas or in semi-rural environments on the edges of cities — because of the general belief that they have more disposable consumer goods in them — are more vulnerable to burglars than other houses.
Neighbourhood watch schemes can identify the premises most vulnerable and the people most vulnerable. Neighbour helping neighbour in co-operation with the Garda Síochána can be effective in preventing crime. Deputy Hyland gave a commitment of support and co-operation in the fight against crime, and I welcome that. The Deputy spoke about the £11.5 million voted for prisons in 1984 and the fact that only £5.5 million was spent. The Deputy suggested that that indicated a lack of commitment. The fact that only £5.5 million was spent was not an indication of a lack of commitment to bring our prison accomodation up to planned levels. These sums related mainly to the prison in Wheatfield, which is on target. The money was not spent because certain contracts did not fall to be paid before the end of the year. It was intended to commence construction of a place of detention for male juveniles at Wheatfield early in 1984. In order to make the most of the good weather financial provision was made for a full year's building work in the Vote. In view of the need for more accommodation it was decided to construct an expanded plan which would provide 320 places rather than the orginal 150. This caused some delay because it was necessary to revise the working drawings and adjust the tender documents. As a result the contract was not placed until just before the builders' holidays. Large scale work did not commence until September and much less expenditure than anticipated arose. The work is on target and is due for completion towards the end of 1987. Perhaps the later start in 1984 will be more than compensated for by doubling the accommodation provided.
The James' Street project was referred to. I intended to acquire a residence used by the Christian Brothers in James' Street. There was local opposition to it and the property was withdrawn from sale. The project was not abandoned by me. The matter was taken out of my hands because the religious order involved refused to go ahead with the sale because of local opposition.
Deputy Hyland suggested that I am reacting to events in dealing with crimes which were a symptom and that I was not getting to the root causes. There is nothing to add to what I said in my speech this morning. I accept that there is a relationship between crime and people living in underprivileged areas, but while we are waiting for economic and social improvements we have to deal with the symptom. We must invoke the courts, the Garda and the prisons to deal with the criminal manifestations, whatever the root causes. I accept that we cannot ignore the root causes.
Deputy Hyland is opposed to the liberalisation of the licensing laws and referred to newspaper reports of 6 June regarding a submission to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Legislation on the question of drink abuse and to the amendment of the intoxicating liquor laws. I intend fulfilling the decision taken by the Government in the national plan. I will give licences to high grade restaurants under certain restrictive conditions. I intend proposing to the Government that licensed premises should remain open until 11 p.m. on Sunday night all year round and that there should be some extension in June, July and August as outlined in the national plan. I do not know what the Government will decide on that but I am thinking of a modest extension in opening time. That is not the end of the matter. I have major proposals in hand for a Bill to amend the licensing laws which range over the whole area of under age drinking, clubs, endorsements and the whole area relating to drink about which representations have been made.
Deputy Hyland suggested that Garda manpower was being reduced in rural areas. It is not, but the numbers in the DMA have increased by over 600 in the same period. The numbers in rural areas are being kept up.
Deputy Walsh complained of a delay in the provision of a new station for Tallaght. The Deputy will appreciate that the provision of Garda stations is a matter for the OPW. The arrangements for the provision of a new station in Tallaght are at an advanced stage. I understand that the OPW have received tenders for the building of the new station and are processing those as quickly as possible and there will not be a delay in placing the contract.
Deputy McGahon referred to the idea of a police reserve. I do not have plans to establish a police reserve. I am concentrating on identifying tasks that can be performed by civilians.
I have dealt with the major points raised by the Opposition spokesmen. A number of other points were made which were dealt with during Question Time or in my speech this morning.
The matter raised by Deputy Haughey is the most serious matter raised in this debate today. We have tremendous sympathy for the victims of the Stardust fire and for Deputy Haughey, who I know was sincere in his contribution here today. The Deputy urged that special provision be made for the Stardust victims and their dependants and made three recommendations for examination — that I should accept the principle that I should intervene in the process of determining their claims for compensation; that I should re-examine both the civil legal aid scheme and the scheme of compensation for criminal injuries with a view to assisting them in steering their way through the procedures; and that I should, by way of legislation if necessary, bring about special sittings of the High Court to this end.
The matters raised by Deputy Haughey are not only complex but touch on fundamental issues of constitutional law affecting the separation of the Judiciary and the Executive. In the time available to me I can only undertake to have these questions examined as a matter of urgency. I should make it clear that this does not imply any commitment on my part. In the limited time since Deputy Haughey's contribution I have been informed that 219 writs in all were issued, 108 statements of claim were filed and that the State has delivered a defence in 79 of these. One case started in February of 1984 has gone through the process and a notice of trail has been received. If it were acceptable, and without commitment, that this would be seen as a test case for liability, that might be a way of expediting matters in the other 219 cases. I would ask Deputy Haughey to consider that. Both the Deputy and the House will appreciate that this is an initial response as I had very little time to get a detailed reply to the points made by the Deputy. We all share the Deputy's concern and we should bend our will and our minds to seeking to solve this problem because, as the Deputy pointed out, if all other systems fail this House is the last resort and the Government must be the instrument of this House in providing justice. I accept what Deputy Haughey said and hope that we can as a result of his intervention come up with some process which will expedite things for the people involved in litigation and which will bring them to justice in a shorter period than if we had not had Deputy Haughey's intervention.
