Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 12 Dec 1985

Vol. 362 No. 11

Vote 23: Office of the Minister for Justice.

Minister for Justice (Mr. Noonan,

Limerick East): I move:

That a supplementary sum not exceeding £1 million be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 1985, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for Justice, and of certain other services administered by that Office, and for payment of a grant-in-aid.

With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to discuss the Supplementary Estimates for the Office of the Minister for Justice and Prisons together.

The Supplementary Estimate for the Office of the Minister for Justice is required to meet additional expenditure on three subheads of the Vote — Salaries, Wages and Allowances, Commissions and Special Inquiries, and Criminal Legal Aid — as well as for the creation of an additional subhead in respect of the Stardust Victims' Compensation Tribunal. The total additional expenditure amounts to £1.5 million, but £100,000 of this can be met from savings elsewhere in the Vote. The net additional sum now sought is, therefore, £1.4 million.

A sum of £1 million of the total allocation being sought in the Supplementary Estimate for the Office of the Minister for Justice is in respect of compensation to victims of the Stardust disaster and incidental expenses in connection with the operation of the Stardust Victims' Compensation Tribunal.

The tribunal has decided on the amount of compensation in approximately 30 cases. Some awards have been accepted and the remainder are under consideration by the claimants. The main purpose of the Supplementary Estimate is to enable payment to be made this year to claimants who have accepted awards. Provision, of course, will be made in the 1986 Estimates for payment of a much greater number of awards next year.

I think that it is appropriate that I should say a few words in general about the Stardust Victims' Compensation Tribunal. The tribunal is empowered to award ex gratia compensation to victims of the Stardust disaster and their families, assessed under the Rules of the Civil Liability Act, 1961. Copies of the scheme of compensation for personal injuries suffered at the Stardust, Artane, on 14 February 1981, were laid before each House of the Oireachtas on 22 October last. Notice were placed in newspapers on 23 October stating that application forms could be obtained from the secretary to the tribunal in St. David's secondary school, Artane, Dublin. Accordingly, the tribunal has been dealing with claims and inquiries from its office in Artane since the last week in October.

As Deputies will be aware, the Government decided to set up the tribunal so that the agony suffered by the victims of the Stardust tragedy and their families could be brought to an end speedily. The single most important point about the tribunal is that it can act quickly, informally and on the most favourable terms possible for claimants. It can act without causing any of the worry and the unavoidable delays that can be involved in processing claims of this nature through the courts.

The scheme also avoids the question of the legal liability of the various defendants, as well as questions of contributory negligence, which could arise in proceedings in the courts or even before the Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal. In addition, under the Stardust tribunal claimants can be certain of getting awards, as they are guaranteed by the State.

In brief, the tribunal places the welfare of the claimants first, and the Government are satisfied that it can settle compensation cases fairly and quickly.

With regard to the increased provision sought for criminal legal aid, my Department have no effective control over the two main determinants of expenditure which are first, the decision by the courts to grant such aid and, second, the cost arising from the grant of it in any particular case. The courts alone have discretion to grant criminal legal aid and it would simply not be feasible to limit that discretion without changing the statutory, perhaps even the constitutional position. Deputies will probably be aware that there is a Supreme Court ruling to the effect that accused persons have a constitutional right to legal aid in certain circumstances.

A number of factors contributed to the high rate of expenditure this year. These include increased recourse generally to legal aid by the courts in disposing of criminal business coming before them and overall, the speedier processing of claims submitted by solicitors and counsel under the scheme.

I might add that included in the revised allocation sought for this subhead in 1985 is the cost of paying the VAT on legal fees which is currently running at 23 per cent; however, this is ultimately recouped to the Exchequer.

In my speech on my Department's Estimates for 1985 on 6 June 1985, I said that the Estimate for prisons of £49.715 million would have to be revised later in the year to cater for additional expenditure arising from the unprecedented growth in the numbers in custody. At present there are 1,900 prisoners in custody, though at times this year the number has been more than 2,000. This compares with a daily average last year of 1,590. The increase has been achieved, as Members of the House will be aware, by maximising the use of existing custodial accommodation, by taking over Fort Mitchel on Spike Island from the Department of Defence and by the temporary use of the education units at Cork and Arbour Hill prisons and the work-education unit at Limerick prison as dormitory-type accommodation for prisoners.

As a society, we can take little pride in the level of serious crime which has given rise to such a large increase in the number of prisoners being catered for in our institutions. That level of crime, a worrying element of which is drug-related, is a reflection of deeper problems in our society. The identification of these social problems and their alleviation are, of course, matters of priority for the Government but as they encompass a wide range of questions which extend beyond my brief as Minister for Justice, I do not intend to dwell on them here. However, the range of difficult medical, psychiatric, social and personal problems, which the prisoners present to the prison administration, including health problems consequent on drug abuse, are a matter of serious concern to me.

Imprisonment and the provision of more custodial places is not, of course, perceived by the Government to be the complete response to the crime problem. What imprisonment primarily fulfils is the removal from the streets of criminals who are inflicting pain and havoc on innocent victims. The seriousness of their offences is recognised by the courts in the length of sentences imposed.

Imprisonment, however, cannot deal with the causes of crime and that is why I have emphasised repeatedly the responsibility that the community itself carries at local level in crime prevention matters. Therefore, community based schemes represent an important complementary response to the crime problem. Schemes of this nature which I have in mind are Neighbourhood Watch and the activities of voluntary groups who provide supportive facilities in the community for offenders and young people at risk in association with my Department's Probation and Welfare Service. As a matter of policy, I will continue to provide all possible support to legitimate community-based activities in this area.

Further, because imprisonment represents only one method, the most drastic one, of dealing with offenders convicted by the courts. I have tried to encourage the development of alternatives to imprisonment and this approach has been endorsed by the recently published report of the Whitaker Committee of Inquiry into the Penal System. In particular, some offenders who otherwise would have been sent to prison have been dealt with under the community service scheme since it was brought into operation earlier this year.

Notwithstanding all these efforts, the prison service, as I have already pointed out, has had to cope with a phenomenal increase in a relatively short period of time, in the numbers in custody and in the numbers serving long sentences. I would like to take this opportunity to compliment the service on the manner in which it has coped with these difficulties. The service performs an important task on behalf of the community and its role in the fight against crime is often overlooked.

The higher numbers in custody and the limiting of early releases to those cases where special resocialisation programmes have been approved has, however, meant that, in terms of prison administration, the numbers in custody in some of the prisons have been undesirably high. I am taking steps to ease this situation as much as possible. A new cell block at Cork prison which will cater for 50 prisoners will be ready next year and I am looking at a number of other possibilities which could yield additional accommodation.

Extra prisoners, of course, can only be accommodated at a cost, hence the need for this Supplementary Estimate. The major cost is in respect of the higher staffing levels needed to deal with the additional numbers in custody. Extra posts have had to be staffed in all the prisons this year in order to maintain good order and security.

The total additional amount required is £2,810,000 under the subheads salaries, wages and allowances and prison services but savings elsewhere, amounting to £1,050,000, reduce the net additional amount required to £1,760,000.

The additional amount required for salaries, wages and allowances, including overtime, is £2,350,000 and I have just referred to the reasons it is necessary. The additional amount required for prisons services is £350,000. This subhead makes provision for offenders to be fed, clothed, provided with fuel and light, medical care and so on, and the increase in the prison population inevitably means that additional resources must be made available. In addition there will be a shortfall of £110,000 on the Appropriations-in-aid. This is due to a shortfall in the anticipated receipts from the prisons manufacturing and farm department.

Savings have been possible under four subheads. A sum of £300,000 has been saved on subhead B — trevelling and incidental expenses — because Garda escorts were not availed of to the extent anticipated and the requirement for uniforms was not as high as had been expected. A saving of £100,000 has been possible on subhead C — Postal and Telecommunications. A saving of £500,000 has been possible on subhead D — Buildings and Equipment — because certain contracts did not proceed as quickly as anticipated and the final saving, £150,000 on subhead G — Probation and Welfare Services — is due to the failure to identify suitable premises for use as probation workshops or hostels.

The supplementary estimate for the Office of the Minister for Justice also covers the expenses of the Kerry Babies Tribunal which came in course for payment during the current year. There was no provision in the original Estimate for the tribunal because at the time the Estimate was framed, a decision had not been taken to establish it. The sittings lasted from 28 December 1984 to 14 June 1985.

A legal team consisting of a solicitor and senior and junior counsel was appointed to assist the tribunal. Furthermore, the tribunal allowed similar representation to the Attorney General and the Director of Public Prosecutions, to the Hayes family, the three Garda superintendents, and to 25 other gardaí.

The expenditure this year covers the fees paid to the lawyers representing the tribunal and the Attorney General and Director of Public Prosecutions and the fees paid to stenographers. Also included are the cost of certain witnesses' expenses, accommodation costs and the cost of equipping offices in Tralee and Dublin.

Further significant expenditure will arise due to the direction made by the tribunal pursuant to section 6 of the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) (Amendment) Act, 1979 to the effect that the costs of the Hayes family, the Garda superintendents and the various other members of the Garda Síochána involved be paid by the State. As these costs have yet to be presented and taxed it is not possible at this stage to state the amount involved. In any event, payment will not arise in the current year.

Mr. Haughey

I do not intend to delay the House because the time available to us to discuss this Supplementary Estimate is very inadequate. The introduction at this stage of the Supplementary Estimates for the prison service and for the Office of the Minister is a stark and clear reflection of the state of law and order today. We have now reached a state of emergency proportions in this respect. There is no improvement. The level of protection afforded to our citizens, whether on the streets, in their homes or in public places is totally inadequate. Among the many failures that will be laid at the door of this Government will be their failure to preserve law and order for the protection of the people generally. That will rank among the major failures of the Government.

My colleagues will be elaborating on these matters. I merely wished to offer that personal opinion about the stressful state in which we find ourselves.

There is one item in this Supplementary Estimate that I wish to welcome and that is within the heading of G.3 whereby £1 million is being provided on account to meet the compensation being awarded by the Stardust Tribunal. I am glad to be able to report that, so far as I am aware, the tribunal is doing its work well. There is a practice that the applicants are not disclosing the amounts being awarded to them. I understand that the original idea for this was that if an applicant was not accepting an award and was proceeding to the High Court, he or she would not be at liberty to disclose how much had been awarded by the tribunal. That rule has been extended to cover all awards so that apparently the applicants are not at liberty to tell us how much they are being awarded. I am aware, though, that there is satisfaction with the amounts being awarded and with the way in which the tribunal is discharging its very serious responsibilities. That is a matter of satisfaction all round. I trust that the tribunal will continue to operate as it has been operating and will continue to warrant the approval and acceptance of the families concerned.

I wish particularly to express a word of thanks to the Attorney General whom, I think the Minister will agree, was the prime mover in having the tribunal established and being put into operation on such a satisfactory basis. All of us on this side of the House have occasion from time to time to criticise the Attorney General or perhaps the law officers or the Minister for Justice, but this is one occasion on which we acknowledge gladly that when the matter of the Stardust tragedy finally came to a head, the solution put forward was carefully thought out and the matter was approached with considerable open-mindedness. All those of us who have been involved in the Stardust question for a number of years are deeply appreciative of the tribunal's work and we hope that this long outstanding and agonising matter may be coming to a conclusion.

No one will ever make up to the families for the losses they suffered but at least adequate levels of compensation are now being made available to them. I express my appreciation at and Fianna Fail's appreciation at how the tribunal has worked. Whereas the legal and judicial establishment cannot look back with any credit on the whole situation, at least this House was finally instrumental in ensuring that the matter was effectively dealt with. I am giving hostage to fortune at this stage but I am reasonably confident that the tribunal will achieve what it was established to achieve. While this House might not have been as expeditious in recognising the problem as we might have been, at least when it finally came to the attention of the House the House dealt with it in an effective manner.

Mr. L.T. Cosgrave

Like the previous speaker I support the action which has been taken in relation to the Stardust Tribunal. We are all aware of that great tragedy the aftermath of which still lives with the relatives of those involved. Due to the cumbersome process of the law and to the fact that it is highly unusual for us to have such a major tragedy, until recently redress has not been found for those affected. I and other Members of the House received correspondence from individuals affected and to date they have not received any compensation. We all support the initiative taken by the Minister for Justice, by the Attorney General and their officials to get these cases moving. I hope that most of the claimants will avail of this procedure which will mean that their cases can be expeditiously and fairly dealt with. It appears that the process has worked well since its inception about six weeks ago and I hope this will continue to be the case. We all support the money being voted towards those cases. By this time next year we hope most of these cases will be dealt with and that people will have received some compensation, although compensation will never make up for the great loss incurred. I have noted that lawyers move slowly and that it is a time consuming process gathering Garda reports and medical reports as obviously some of the injuries were horrific and possibly needed to be evaluated after a certain amount of time had passed.

I reject what the previous speaker said in relation to there being a total emergency. I agree that we have a serious crime problem in certain areas but action recently taken has helped improve the situation. When the statistics for crime come out we will see an improvement in the position. We are all concerned at some of the recent horrific attacks which have taken place. This sort of attack unfortunately has become part and parcel of today's world. There have also been many robberies of houses, labour exchanges and banks. As recenty as yesterday some art works were stolen. We are all concerned at the crime rate but it can only be dealt with by concerted action and a positive approach towards ensuring that the Garda have the best resources and that criminals become convinced of the likelihood of their being apprehended and imprisoned for their crimes.

I welcome the neighbourhood watch schemes in many areas. It is important that these pilot schemes get full support and are monitored. The Minister and many of us here are aware of the benefits which could ensue from these schemes. It is important to encourage the initiative of concerned people who are aware of the need for crime prevention but we must also educate people who are not so concerned as to the needs. It is also important that facilities in Garda stations are adequate to deal with the possible extra input from the public. Basic facilities such as telephones should be working in areas and in the stations. In some areas only one or two houses have a phone. There must be a link up between the Department and Bord Telecom to ensure that needed phones are provided.

Many of the robberies that have taken place are drug-related crimes. While a number of people involved in these crimes have been brought to trial and convicted one worrying aspect of this difficult problem relates to bail. Individuals who have to face up to 40 or 50 charges are out on bail and are continuing to rob. We must look at this area seriously. When a person is charged with a number of offences and has appeared on remand a number of times, something has to be done in relation to the application of bail. While there are rules obtaining as to how and under what circumstances bail is granted, we must examine that area. Even if only ensuring that money is well spent we should examine the rules of crime prevention because it appears that crime pays many people. While there have been improvements effected in the overall crime situation it remains serious. Only through concerted effort and support for the Garda over a period of time will we ensure that the number of crimes are reduced. I hope public support for the Garda will be maintained.

Another matter mentioned was the moneys voted for the Kerry Babies' Tribunal which lasted a considerable time. We had a Bill here last week providing for an extra judge, which appointment was partly occasioned by the fact that at times there are enormous delays in cases being brought forward. There have been several tribunals in recent years which has meant that a High Court judge has been taken out of action or prevented from performing his normal day to day duties. However, in that case, it was important that the full facts be discovered, that the truth be established. It was important also because it appeared there was a certain element engaging in a witch hunt against the Garda.

It is important to keep things in perspective. While there have been incidents of misbehaviour on the part of some members of the Garda, that is no reason for us damning the whole force because in any large group of people there will always be bound to be one or two defaulters. It is my opinion that the vast majority of the force are honest, decent people endeavouring to work for the people and who deserve their support. I know the present Minister and Commissioner are more than anxious to root out any such defaulters but that is no excuse for suddenly condemning the whole force. Probably we have all learned from the Kerry babies' case and its aftermath.

I might refer briefly to our prisons system. It is important to remember the high cost of maintaining law and order in this country and of imprisoning people, some for quite a long time, some of whom probably should never be freed again. Therefore, it is important to remember the high cost and also the fall out from the troubles in Northern Ireland. We are all conscious of the concern that this part of the country should never be used as a haven. The fact that so many people who have committed crimes in Northern Ireland are now imprisoned down here speaks for itself. That fact should not be forgotten, particularly in view of the recent initiative which we hope will lead us some way down the road towards peace and stability.

I hope the Minister will be afforded a few minutes to reply later. Some items arising are deserving of more than a couple of hours debate. However, because of the way we order our business, at times some of the more important matters receive less time and others, less important, receive more. I have in mind the operation of the community service orders scheme. The Minister might inform us as to how this scheme has been operating. There is no doubt that some people may be sent to prison who — if that scheme was operational in certain areas — could have worked for the greater benefit of the community and themselves under the provisions of that scheme. The operation of this scheme might be reviewed on a regional or national basis, ascertaining how many of those community service orders have been put into effect and what projects or areas have benefited therefrom.

We are all aware of the problems obtaining with regard to prison accommodation and its cost. It is not a simple matter of erecting four walls and locking up people. We should all condemn the recent attacks on prison officers and public property. Prisoners who have committed crimes while in prison, damaging property and so on, should be treated the same as anyone else out on the street. It is ridiculous to see some prisoners giving an interview from a prison roof and here we must get our priorities in order.

It is important that all of us give the Garda our fullest support. It is important also that we, public representatives, advocate and facilitate neighbourhood watch schemes. We can be of assistance in promoting them, putting people in touch with members of the Garda in our areas, ensuring the prevention of crime. This would bring about the link up in the chain between the public, being the eyes and ears of the Garda, and the work of the Garda themselves in those endeavours.

Dr. Woods

I support the Estimate. We have no hesitation in supporting the allocation of moneys in this area provided they are spent effectively. We should spare no cost in dealing with the present crime situation. If you have not security you have nothing. In effect the cost is now being passed on to the house owner and the business person through extra insurance. We all know that house insurance has gone through the roof. It has more than doubled and the cost of car insurance has become almost prohibitive. There is a direct cost on the State in providing security and a cost on the individual citizen. Therefore we have no hesitation in supporting this Estimate.

At the same time I note that we were presented with a revision in the budget this year when the Minister for Finance claimed that he was making £28 million savings. He took £1.066 million from the Votes for Justice. He has lost that. It has been taken back from him with £2 million in addition, so it is almost £3 million in total. Admittedly, £1 million of that is for the Stardust tribunal, so in real terms it is £2 million against £1 million cutback earlier. Only in the context of statements made in relation to this kind of cut at budget time, and when we are told about the feasibility of it do we realise that, in the longer term, the money was more than needed. We also needed an extra £1 million, and this is what we must deal with here.

I welcome the setting up of the Stardust victims' compensation tribunal and the funds provided here for that. I agree with our party leader that this money has been handled very well on the part of the House. In the putting forward of a tribunal in the first instance the House played a major part, and now the claims are to be settled. It is hoped that this will help the parents, relations and friends of the victims to put behind them much of the suffering, problems and difficulty which followed that tragic event. However, the House must be aware that the relatives and friends of the Stardust victims feel very strongly that their deaths will have been in vain if the fire regulations are not implemented and higher standards of safety put in train for the protection of ordinary citizens. That was as important to the relatives of the victims as the mere money aspect, and they made that point very clearly. I appreciate that the tribunal will put an end to the repetition of many of the details of the tragic event. The House has played an honourable role in making that arrangement and we have great pleasure in supporting the provision here for the tribunal. The people on the ground want the House to ensure that this kind of tragedy can never happen again.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy will appreciate that that is a matter for another Department and another Minister.

Dr. Woods

I am making a passing reference.

An Ceann Comhairle

I am putting down a marker.

Dr. Woods

In the general area of crime there is something radically wrong with the administration of law and order for which the Minister for Justice is responsible. Violent crime is increasing and the chance of being caught has reached an all time low. Two areas indicate this very clearly. Between 1980 and 1984 burglaries in private homes in the Dublin area increased from 6,591 to 12,073 but the detection rate fell from 41 per cent to a new low of 24.4 per cent. In other words, three out of every four or 75 per cent of house burglaries went undetected. Armed robberies are once again on the increase. Recent figures from the Department of Justice show that with 457 armed robberies in the first nine months of this year, only 10 per cent of the money stolen was recovered. Similarly, in 1984, 90 per cent of the money and property stolen were not recovered.

This is a hopeless record which this administration seem incapable of facing up to. If we are to reduce crime then there must be a deterrent. The potential criminal must know that he will be caught, exposed and punished for his crime. He must see that his friends and associates are caught. It must be clear to people that crime will not pay, that if your friends are involved in crime it will not pay in their case and if you are involved they will see that it will not pay you. Otherwise you create a whole environment in which crime pays. At present in these respects crime is paying in the Dublin metropolitan area. Most crime is undetected and the goods are not recovered.

The Minister mentioned some of his policies in relation to that. His policy in relation to the adoption of a number of remedies and measures has had every support and encouragement in this House. Indeed, many of the ideas which have been put into practice came from the House and Members on all sides of the House will give this area their utmost support, but the Minister's policy of confrontation is a disaster. He needs the support of the prison service, yet he has confronted and insulted them at every opportunity. Publicly he boasts about how he has humiliated them and in this House he has done the same thing. He seems to take pleasure in the fact that he has beaten the prison officers in some way. He said on 9 May 1985, and I quote from the Official Report, column 630, Volume 358:

That is part of the folklore which is propagated in statements from the Prison Officers Association, particularly by their secretary, Mr. McEvoy, who because of an industrial dispute in Mountjoy Prison which gave me and the Department and this House control of the prisons again after they had been run by a trade union for many years, is running a vendetta ever since and he is disseminating incorrect information to Deputies on the other side of the House and to the media.

That is only one small reference to the kind of thing with which we are all familiar now, the Minister confronting his own prison officers through the media. Indeed, this morning further confrontation and disagreement are reported in the papers in relation to the Portlaoise outbreak. The Minister comes into the House to ask us for moneys for additional support for the prison service. He says they are doing a good job catering for a larger number of inmates than ever before, and we have no hesitation in giving that support. However, publicly he humilitates and confronts them repeatedly. He should change his policy of confrontation. It may get good media coverage from day to day but in the longer term it is not a good policy. These are his officers and he should learn to work and develop the service with them, however hard he must be in doing that.

The Garda are also frustrated. They do not seem to trust the Minister. They see him trying to use the new proposed complaints procedure to deny them their basic right to silence. They too still await the introduction of new powers of arrest embodied in the Criminal Justice Act. Both of these services urgently need new management thinking and a radical new approach to training. There is no question about that and those involved want somebody to give them a lead in regard to new management thinking and new training methods. Until that happens they cannot radically improve their contribution to the maintenance of law and order which is vital. The Minister in his statement recognises that.

The devastation of Spike Island gave an insight into the lack of management, the lack of planning and follow-through by the Minister, matters that are far too serious for the Minister to fob off in the way he did. There was no plan or strategy of support and back-up on Spike Island in the event of a break-out. Indeed, I understand that there is still no special back-up for gardaí in that area. I hope the Minister will outline the measures taken to ensure that we do not have a repetition of those incidents. The selection procedures were allowed to deteriorate and the lives of civilians and staff were put at risk.

The Minister has repeatedly refused to put a figure on the damage and we do not have an estimate in the figures before us. That money had to be found and was put into the system without Members being given details of it. When I pressed the Minister about the cost of the damage he did not give us any figure but said it would be tied up with the new development work on prisons. It is worth noting that the Minister did not show any such reluctance when he commented on the damage in Mountjoy Prison in November 1983. On that occasion he attempted to blame the prison officers. In contrast, he is aware that in regard to Spike Island he has but himself to blame for the loss. Perhaps that is why we cannot get the figures.

The Minister must change his attitude and give his wholehearted support to the Garda and to prison officers. He has to take the good with the bad. He must stand behind them when things are tough at their end even if that involves public relations problems. Those people must deal daily with the criminal and the bully and must be prepared to take them on. One is forced to ask if the Minister is compromised by the events he engineered. Is he a prisoner of his own confrontations and a cause of mistrust and low morale? We are adopting a fresh and modern approach to management and training in our State and semi-State bodies and I should like to know why this is not happening in regard to the Garda and the prison service where it is badly needed. The same type of management techniques which we see applying to State and semi-State bodies are badly needed in the Garda Síochána. Members of the force are looking for a morale boost and for targets to be set for them by people who know something about management. The Minister should give his attention to this.

The Minister's attitude to the drug problem is a cause for concern. Drugs are still the greatest single cause of crime and our courts and prisons show this clearly with the high percentage of offenders being drug abusers. However, the Minister appears to be complacent about this problem. He seems to have lost the drive and sense of urgency needed. Repeatedly he tells us that the heroin problem has plateaued out but that type of talk from the Minister breeds complacency in the services and hence vigilance at ports and airports is reduced, especially at weekends. The Minister cites the fact that 70 per cent of drug seizures in 1984 were made by gardaí who were not members of the Drug Squad and puts that figure forward as an achievement. It is an achievement in its own right but does it not show how diffuse the problem has become? The problem has spread out and ordinary gardaí are coming in contact with the drug problem. The Garda in 1982 and since have been successful in putting well identified big dealers behind bars but many smaller dealers moved in to take their place. They must be tackled vigorously and shown that there will not be any let-up at any level.

I was disturbed recently to hear the Minister say, in replying to questions, that he did not know about the position at our ports and so on. Who is co-ordinating the attack on drugs? I am aware that a task force was established but we have not heard much about it in recent times. The Minister for Justice should co-ordinate all efforts. With cutbacks and pressure on overtime other sectors, such as the customs service, may find it difficult to provide the necessary manpower to watch our ports and airports effectively. It appears that that has been eased up. The Minister should discuss the matter with the Minister for Finance to try to ensure that the drive is kept up at all levels. If vigilance slackens the drug problem will increase rapidly.

The position in our prisons is still chaotic and it appears that there is little difficulty in getting supplies of drugs into Mountjoy. In recent times two drug related deaths occurred in that prison and at the same time it was reported that 20 out of 26 women there were there for drug related crimes. We have been told that that figure is usually one-third. Reports suggest that the position is similar in regard to male inmates. The Minister may argue about those figures but it appears that a substantial proportion of those inmates are there because of drug related crimes.

There is no secure facility for the screening and detoxification of drug addicted prisoners. We have raised that matter with the Minister on many occasions in the last two years and we learn that the problem is still critical. Unfortunately, it is not until there is a major issue that action is taken. At the root of our prison problem lies the decision taken by the Minister to cut the estimates for the prison capital building programme by £6 million in 1983 and 1984. I note that in this Estimate there will be a saving on the prison building programme of £500,000 which will go to offset additional costs. That seems to indicate that this year the Minister will spend most of the money allocated to him for that programme.

At the end of 1984 the Minister handed back a further £6 million which was not spent. This year only £500,000 is being handed back from the allocation. Belatedly, he is providing capital needed this year, but his cutback in this area has set back the building programme by two to three years.

I am somewhat surprised that in these Supplementary Estimates there is no provision for a supplementary allocation for Garda pay and overtime — overtime, in particular. On being questioned earlier, the Minister said that he would be making a special provision in the autumn so that the towns, rural areas and particularly the cities would be protected notwithstanding the fact that in October he was moving more members of the Garda towards the Border. We asked him then what measures he planned to ensure the continuance of adequate protection in the cities and the high crime areas, particularly coming up to Christmas. We see that it is intended to send more Garda to the Border area and it would appear that one of the effects of the Anglo-Irish Agreement will be fewer gardaí on the streets of Dublin. We would like to hear how the Minister plans to overcome this problem and provide for an adequate police force, particularly in the major crime areas. Perhaps he would clarify the position when replying and also deal with the further question of the additional resources which are being committed to that area. There is a particularly bad situation in certain communities, almost a total breakdown of law and order. It is to these areas that the manpower must be committed.

Another aspect is that of the task force. We are told that the Minister is sending a new task force group of approximately 30 members to the Border but we know that as part of the savings in Garda pay and overtime he set about systematically disestablishing the security and intelligence network established by his predecessors. These had proved to be highly effective in dealing with serious crime and subversion. Armed robbery is now coming back on to the streets, in Dublin in particular. It is one phenomenon to be seen in recent statistics. There is a need for this type of task force in the city to deal with armed crime which is not apparently, from the reports given by the Minister, of a subversive nature. The Minister made a serious mistake when he totally disbanded the task forces and greatly restricted the activities of the special task force based in Dublin. There was a clear need for reorganisation of the divisional task force, but to disband the 45 units, comprising some 300 members strategically placed throughout the country, was to incur an unacceptable level of risk, especially in the Border area.

The Minister is now thinking of reestablishing a task force, in what form we do not know. We must wait and see. Non-subversive robbery is a particularly frightening type of robbery and perhaps the Minister would look at the reintroduction of the special task force. When media people ask the Minister what he is doing, the terminology that he uses can be very important. He kept insisting then that the task forces were not being disbanded and in response to a question said that the Garda authorities had in recent months made certain organisational changes under which the members of those divisional task forces had been integrated with the detective units in the various Garda divisions in which they operated. The Commissioner happened to say, in an interview reported in The Sunday Press that they had been disbanded, but that was a slip between the Minister and the Commissioner. Effectively, they were disbanded and their availability was gone. Their freedom of movement and the overtime available which allowed that kind of freedom were gone. We want this non-subversive armed robbery curbed before it develops any further.

I want to raise another question with regard to the Department of Justice. We have been concerned recently with the investigations carried out by the "Today Tonight" television team on the subject of moneylending and this question has been raised in the House in another context. The Minister is responsible for dealing with this very serious area in which very defenceless people are being tackled by these moneylenders. The insights given by the members of the St. Vincent de Paul and the "Today Tonight" team showed that people were being required to pay from 64 per cent to 200 per cent interest on loans to buy the normal necessities of life, for Christmas time, for ESB bills and so on. I am acquainted with one or two cases where people got into difficulties with their mortgages and got into the hands of these moneylenders. In one of the cases in which I was involved the rate of interest was over 70 per cent.

People are being canvassed by these moneylenders. Some of the companies have no licences and are spread throughout the country. One was named Jordan Estates in Dublin and it had branches outside Dublin for which it was alleged there were no certificates. They were owned by Enigma Variations which had 50 per cent of funds coming in from the New Ireland Company and 40 per cent from Guinness Mahon. There was quite an extraordinary linkage there from the normal financial procedure back to what was shown to be illegal moneylending. It was shown that Jordan Estates canvassed by letter drops asking, "Do you need money for Christmas?" Apparently they do not require the signature of a spouse. They admitted to rates of interest in excess of 39 per cent. In one instance in Waterford there was talk about 64 per cent interest, including a 10 per cent service charge.

This is an extremely serious matter and we want to see the law enforced in regard to it. We want the imposition of increased penalties. Law enforcement is a normal part of the procedure carried out by the Minister for Justice. He should use the powers that exist under the Act to crack down on these moneylenders who make excessive demands. Admittedly, these powers can be strengthened and the penalties can be increased. What investigations has the Minister made following these disquieting disclosures? Why did the Garda not act in these cases, and act sooner? We are allowing poor people to be exploited and the police must have known that this was happening. What is wrong with our society is that these things can happen, people hear about them and the law is not implemented. If the Minister is serious, this is also an area where the law will have to be implemented. The Act gives the Minister fairly wide authority to make regulations. He could be taking steps to ensure that this kind of bleeding of people who are in serious difficulties is stopped. Section 6 (6) of the Moneylenders Act, 1933, states:

The Minister for Justice shall make rules with respect to the procedure to be followed in making applications for certificates (including the notices to be given of intention to make such an application), and certificates shall be in such form as may be prescribed by the rules so made.

It also states that the Minister may make regulations. It is very clear on restrictions on moneylenders. One is not allowed to canvass or to charge more than 39 per cent. It shall also be illegal to charge on any sum on account of costs or charges or expenses incidental or relating to negotiations for the granting of loans or proposed loans. The illegality of all these actions is clearly spelled out in the Act, but the penalties should be brought up to date and strengthened. If the Minister would put forward an emergency measure to increase the penalties in this area he would certainly have our support. This kind of updating should be a matter of routine.

Specific individuals were mentioned in this programme and I presume the Minister will ensure that any allegations are investigated. It is suggested that one of these people is an appointee of the Taoiseach to a certain body but nevertheless I am sure the Minister will pursue the matter and examine it in detail.

Mr. Noonan

(Limerick East): Would the Deputy like to expand on the innuendo?

Dr. Woods

Only if the Minister wants me to. There was reference to a Mr. McCullagh, a director of Enigma Variations who, I understand, has been appointed by the Taoiseach.

Mr. Allen

A supporter of the Deputy's party in the south, a respected Fianna Fáil candidate, is also a moneylender.

Dr. Woods

He was not mentioned on the television programme. The other person was.

Mr. Allen

He was mentioned also.

Dr. Woods

We call on the Minister to take action and relieve this situation. Other items mentioned in the Minister's speech include the Kerry babies report. We are making a part payment for the cost of the tribunal and it is regrettable that the Minister did not do what the House asked and request recommendations with the report. Such recommendations would have been particularly interesting and valuable in relation to the new complaints procedure which will be coming before the House shortly for finalisation.

We have no hestitation in supporting this Estimate because we are quite happy to give the Minister this support in tackling difficulties in relation to law and order and security within the State. He will have our full and wholehearted support for expenditure in this area. I ask him to look seriously at the overall management of the law enforcement agencies, the Garda Síochána and the Prison Service, and think about giving them a management uplift of the type which has been given to other areas of State activity. They are ready and anxious to have it and the Minister should set about it at the earliest possible opportunity.

Mr. Allen

I also welcome this Supplementary Estimate. One of my worries is whether we are getting value for money, for example under the criminal legal aid scheme. The Minister said there was a constitutional obligation to provide legal aid to accused persons arising from a Supreme Court decision. There is to be a 10 per cent increase in the amount provided for this scheme, bringing it up to £2.2 million. Having monitored the service in the Cork region, I am very unhappy about the quality of the services being offered to persons under this scheme. It needs major improvement.

I have seen cases where accused persons have been brought into court and offered legal aid, their legal advisers have consulted with them for a brief period and the cases have been presented. The whole thing was haphazard. A lot of money is spent by the State and I wonder if we are getting value for that money and if people brought before the courts are getting justice. I am speaking from experience, having visited the courts and seen how the system works. It is run on a "rush in, rush out, and collect your fee" basis in many cases. There are also many honourable people involved in the service. I ask the Minister to consider this whole question in view of the large amount of taxpayers' money involved.

The whole system of the administration of justice has been causing me much worry recently. There are appalling inefficiencies in the system, manifested in recent court decisions. In a recent case a person was convicted by a jury of serious assault on an elderly farmer and his invalid daughter. They were beaten to pulp. The man ended up in hospital and his daughter is still being cared for. Although a person was convicted, he walked free from the court because of a series of legal cock-ups. When I tried to question it in the Dáil I was told it was none of our business and that it was outside our jurisdiction. We have very serious obligations to ask questions about these matters especially when people are losing confidence in the court system because of these cock-ups and when the morale of the Garda is seriously affected because of legal games. When people walk free because of these games it is time to question what is happening in the courts. I am asking the Minister seriously to consider major reform of the court system. Can we afford the present system whereby two senior counsel, two junior counsel and a solicitor represent both sides in a case?

The cost of insurance has gone through the roof not just because of jury awards. The Minister has taken action in that regard and, although such action is welcome, it will not solve the problem because money is being drained out of the system through over-representation by the legal profession in the courts. There is no will to reform and they give very good reasons why there should not be reforms or change. However, businesses are closing down because they cannot afford insurance premiums. The Minister should make reform in this area one of his priorities in the months ahead.

If he did nothing else between now and leaving office he would have done a good job. The legal profession do not wish to be involved in reform but the Taoiseach is responsible for the Law Reform Commission and he should tell them to introduce proposals for reform and to make positive recommendations which would bring about major changes. Of course, when politicians raise their voices about reforms in the legal profession, they are told they do not know what they are talking about, that it is a matter for the profession. It is not; it affects everybody and if the professions are not willing to implement reforms someone else will have to do it.

I will give an example of how the legal profession close ranks. Criticism was made in June by a High Court judge in Cork regarding the performance of the profession there. Although he half retracted the statement the following day, there are inefficiencies and the President of the High Court, in an unprecedented move, went to Cork outside the court term to tell them to get their act together. They still denied that there was a problem but there is a problem and until politicians assert their authority the problems will continue. The Minister must do something in this regard as soon as possible because, if the Garda do not get the support of the courts, their morale suffers.

The Leader of the Opposition strongly criticised the Minister for his handling of the crime problem. However, there have been major improvements recently. Spike Island, despite many misgivings, has been a success. The epidemic of car stealing and rammings in Cork has been eliminated and the people responsible are behind bars. Except for isolated incidents, the problem has been eradicated by the Minister's positive action. There were problems in regard to Spike Island but mistakes often follow decisions. I commend the Minister for his positive action in relation to Spike Island and I am glad there is to be a programme of reconstruction there.

Even in Dublin there is a 20 per cent reduction in the figures for car stealing and that is an indication that the Minister is doing his job. I am glad the Minister recognises that prisons are only ways of treating the symptoms of crime and that he is aware that the root causes are deprivation, bad housing, unemployment and other factors which we must continue to tackle. Until these problems are tackled fully and eliminated, crime will continue and our prisons will need to be expanded.

I should also like to refer to the problem which has been highlighted recently of moneylenders. The Cork Examiner ran a series of major articles long before the “Today Tonight” programme. The newspaper alleged that children's allowance books are being confiscated by moneylenders who are also taking social welfare payments. I should like the Minister to say what liaison there is between his Department and the Department of Social Welfare to eliminate this problem. If there are prosecutions in relation to the disclosures made in the media, will the Minister give an assurance that some of the untouchables will be brought to justice? Moneylenders come from all classes of society and are the vultures of society, feeding on the misfortunes of the underprivileged. Unless prosecutions and conviction follow, the system will be brought into question.

I congratulate the Minister on his positive approach to crime in recent years. The esteem in which he is held by the Garda and the manner in which he has refused to become involved in interference with the Garda in recent years is something of which we can be proud. He has re-established the standards we expect from public officials.

Mr. Hyland

Like our spokesman, Deputy Woods, I fully support the Estimate which the Minister introduced today. I was very pleased to see our spokesman back in the House and able to take the lead in regard to this very important Estimate.

This Estimate reflects the rapidly changing scene in society, especially over the past five or six years. I hold the view that ten years ago the need for a Supplementary Estimate of this kind would not have arisen. The danger is that the Estimate itself and the vary serious problem which it reflects could pass through this House with the same routine as other Estimates and with a sigh of relief from Members on the Government side that another embarrassing matter has been disposed of.

The purpose of the Fianna Fáil contribution to this debate is not to embarrass the Minister or the Government, but rather we consider the House should have an opportunity to debate the very serious deterioration in law and order and, I hope, to give the Minister an opportunity of outlining Government proposals to deal with the problem. I was disappointed that the Minister did not give the House an indication of any new proposals he might have to deal with the very serious deterioration in law and order.

The complacency with which increasing crime and violence is being accepted in society today reflects a sense of helplessness and despair by our people and, I am sorry to have to say, a lack of confidence in Government and in this House even to contain the problem. If we have fallen into the same trap of complacency, then the situation is very serious and the House must insist on the Minister bringing in, as quickly as possible, a programme of action, and I deliberately place emphasis on the word "action". This is necessary lest we become a nation in which crime is accepted as the norm and our citizens, young and old, will feel insecure and helpless. We read in the papers day after day, and we listen to our news bulletins and hear about the continuing litany of crime under various headings. What at one time would be regarded as a nine day wonder, is now a one or two day wonder, because the next day brings a new headline, a new tragedy. This is a further indication of the very serious deterioration which has taken place in law and order in recent years.

I am glad Deputy Allen made some constructive comments on this very important Estimate. Whatever line of defence the Minister takes when replying to this debate he must accept that the deterioration in law and order has reached alarming proportions, that the nature of crime has become more vicious, that there is an element of fear in communities and homes which did not previously exist and that our Garda, despite their best efforts are frustrated in their attempts to come to grips with the crime problem. A few days ago we heard what I consider to be an alarming statistic in this House. The Minister replying to a question about armed robberies said that £2.5 million was taken in 440 armed robberies over the past 12 months. That is an alarming figure.

I referred earlier to complacency. When preparing my contribution to this debate I went to the Library to look over a month's papers. From 19 November to 5 December we had the following headlines: on 19 November, "Widow Dies after Brutal Attack"; 20 November, "Alert for AIDS in Mountjoy Prison"; 22 November, "Two Die in Arson Attack"; 23 November, "Garda Probe Drug Involvement in City Blaze"; "Rapist Jailed for Nine Years"; 25 November, "Men had Gun and Explosives" relating to the very serious attempted outbreak from Portlaoise Prison; 26 November, "Warders Beaten up in Portlaoise Prison Search", this arose from the attempted outbreak; "Indecent Assault Charge"; 27 November, "£115,000 Arrest Warrant Backlog", this related to the number of uncollected court fines; 28 November, "Hunt for Wicklow Stranglers", we all recall with sadness that particular event; 29 November, "Mother Found Murdered"; 30 November, "Moneylender Slams RTE Programme"; 3 December, "Many Rape Cases Still Untried"— that newspaper report indicated that half the rape cases since 1979 have not yet been dealt with in our courts; and 5 December, "Brutal Attack on Housewife". Apart from the startling revelation in relation to armed robberies, in less than three weeks those are the kind of tales our national newspapers unfortunately had to record. I did not go out of my way to pick a particularly good or bad month to find these statistics. I simply picked out a month's file and went through it methodically. The data in these headlines which I have read into the report are very relevant to the debate.

I know the Minister will endeavour — and I do not blame him for this — to bring forward statistics showing that the level of crime is on the decrease. As a matter of fact, I saw figures published some time ago which seemed to indicate that there is a welcome reduction under certain headings. We on this side of the House, and I am sure Government Deputies as well as the general public, always welcome any indication which reveals a reduction in the level of crime. Whatever statistics may show, the Minister will have to admit that our newspapers and news bulletins continually unfold a litany of crime, to which I have already referred.

The time has come for the Minister to introduce a new co-ordinated plan to deal with crime. This plan should involve all the relevant State agencies. However, there is nothing in the Estimate before us to indicate that the Minister is seriously considering the introduction of such a plan to deal with this serious problem. In my opinion there is a direct link between the level of crime and the social and economic conditions prevailing at any given time.

In fairness to the Minister, it must be said he is now carrying the can for the Government's failure in their various economic and social policies in the past three years. I do not think even the Minister would disagree that the present high and growing level of unemployment is a major factor in the crime rate. It is alarming to note that the policies the Government are continuing to pursue are contributing further to that problem. In the past week in the newspapers there was evidence of a further frightening increase in the unemployment level.

I have not the time to deal in detail with the effects of overall Government policy on the crime rate except to say that it is a major factor and the situation is getting worse. I make the following comment by way of passing reference. I will give the Minister one small example of where I think the social policy of this Government is totally falling down and is a major contributory factor in the deterioration of law and order. In the Estimate today there is provision for £50 million for additional social welfare expenditure. Let us take the case of a family, a husband, wife, two unemployed sons and three unemployed daughters living in Dublin city or in any of the major urban areas. If the three unemployed daughters apply for social welfare assistance they will not be successful because they are residing at home with their parents.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is that the end of the passing reference? It has no bearing on the Estimate before the House. It is not a matter for the Minister.

Mr. Hyland

If the Chair will bear with me for a moment I will demonstrate to the Minister the effect of policies outside his administration on our crime rate. The only way open to those unemployed daughters is to leave their home. If they do this they will qualify for maximum unemployment assistance. Is that not a total undermining of the family unit and an example of a family being put at risk? That kind of social and economic neglect by the Government is a major contributory factor in our crime rate. I have not the time to deal with the failure of the Government in their various economic and social policies and even if I had it is obvious to me at this stage that the Chair would not tolerate it.

The almost daily transit of money between one Government Department and another is a matter of grave concern. Surely at this time it is not unreasonable to ask the Minister, in co-operation with his colleagues in Government, to take the necessary action to eliminate the continuous movement of money between one Government Department and another and between the Department of Social Welfare and the various offices. Of its nature this places at risk the lives of public servants. It puts an unnecessary demand on the Garda Síochána and it necessitates additional security arrangements but the greatest single factor is the risk to public servants, and particularly the gardaí. We recall with sadness the tragic loss of life as an indirect result of this inter-departmental arrangement where money is transported on the roads every day and we recall with sadness the gardaí killed in recent incidents.

Even in the past week another robbery took place in similar circumstances but the Government have not taken any positive action. I want the Minister to tell the House if this matter will be dealt with in the near future. I deliberately use the words "in the near future". One of the great problems in this area of Government administration is that we always seem to be reacting after the event. It is a case of reaction, not anticipation. In the light of our experience an immediate solution must be found to ensure that the lives of our gardaí and of other public servants are not put at risk. We owe this to them, as well as to the people who run our post offices, employment exchanges and health boards. Government performance in areas of economic and social management is always reflected and can be evaluated accurately in the level of crime and lawlessness.

In any debate it is helpful and logical to analyse the factors associated with any problem and to evaluate the effectiveness of the measures adopted by Government to deal with them. An examination of the case history of those convicted of crimes, especially young offenders, indicates that the majority come from deprived backgrounds where they have had little control of their destinies, and we as legislators have failed to provide them with opportunities and work to help them to live fruitful lives in their own communities.

It is true to say that not all of them come from such a background. There are those who deliberately choose crime as a career and who organise it in a professional manner with total disregard for the lives of the public, particularly of those entrusted with the job of protecting the lives of citizens. This House must ensure that the full resources of the State will be available to stamp this out. Prevention is better than cure, and with good economic management and social commitment by the Government, crime could be reduced considerably.

Having endeavoured to demonstrate the Government's dismal failure in the economic sphere and in the preservation of law and order, I will turn my attention to the Minister's efforts to deal with the prevention and the commission of crime and with the matter of detention of criminals. The final matter has been a disaster under this Minister's administration and has resulted in the complete erosion of public confidence in our capacity to deal with violent crime.

Since taking on the role of deputy spokesman on justice, I have had the opportunity to give some serious thought to this problem, and I have met community groups, Garda representatives and members of the Prison Officers' Association. I do not think I am being unfair when I say that never has there been such a feeling of fear among communities and lack of morale among the Garda and prison officers. It is at a very low ebb. This was referred to by Deputy Woods in his contribution.

The problems I have outlined, which the Minister knows to be correct, form a recipe for disaster. Communities need protection and the only people who can provide it are the Garda, working in co-operation with local communities. It goes without saying that if we are to deal effectively with crime we must have an effective system of custody. If these two elements of State security are in any way undermined we will not win the battle against crime and criminals, and I appeal personally to the Minister to see that his and the Department's relations with the Garda and the prison officers, particularly the latter, will be improved quickly.

The time has come for an end to the cold war between the Department and the prison officers. I do not say in a political way that the Minister is responsible because I appreciate his commitment to his work, but he must encourage co-operation between the two bodies I am referring to and the Department. Both groups do a difficult job on behalf of the nation, but if relations between them and the Minister and his officials are not harmonious, we will not get the level of output or commitment possible in regard to State security. I hope that in his reply the Minister will indicate that he has plans for an immediate resumption of harmonious discussions and dialogue with the prison officers.

The Garda have been going through a difficult period and they should not be discouraged, nor should the public perception of them be coloured by the events which have occurred in the past 12 months. Neither the Garda nor the public condone such occurrences. I am afraid we are not sufficiently supportive of the Garda in their fight against crime and violence in our streets. The Garda are labouring under the shadow of the Garda complaints body whose establishment was advocated strongly by my party.

Mr. Noonan

(Limerick East): The Deputy cannot have it both ways: he either wants it or he does not.

Mr. Hyland

The Minister's Bill on the new proposals is not in the House.

Mr. Noonan

(Limerick East): It is in the House.

Mr. Hyland

We are anxious to debate the proposals in that Bill because the sooner the Bill is here for debate the sooner the Garda authorities will feel happy. They have been labouring under the shadow of the Bill which will contain proposals that could not be acceptable to them. They needed the Criminal Justice Act to give them stronger powers and authority to deal with escalating crimes of violence.

Mr. Noonan

(Limerick East): When I rise to reply — I hope I will be able to do so before 5 p.m. — will I be in a position to discuss legislation during a debate on Estimates?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Normally, Deputies should not refer to legislation or pending legislation during an Estimates debate.

Mr. Hyland

I bow to your ruling. I am using that Bill as an example of the failure of the Minister to bring in a complaints procedure. I have been trying to illustrate the lack of co-operation between the Garda and the Department and the Minister. The Garda need to feel that we will provide for them legislation through whose implementation they will feel happy and free to operate on our behalf. I hope when he gets the opportunity to reply the Minister will indicate to us that we will have the Bill before us in the very near future.

Debate adjourned.