I move:
That a sum not exceeding £23,721,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 1986, 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.
I propose that all the Votes for which I am responsible be taken together, but I shall endeavour to answer any questions on any particular Vote. The total Estimate for all the Votes for which I am responsible is £355,231,000, an increase of £23,596,000 or 7 per cent over the expenditure for these Votes in 1985. The Estimate is made up as follows:
Vote 24—Office of the Minister for Justice, £23,721,000,
Vote 25—Garda Síochána, £255,273,000,
Vote 26—Prisons, £60,877,000,
Vote 27—Courts, £9,175,000,
Vote 28—Land Registry and Registry of Deeds, £6,059,000,
Vote 29—Charitable Donations and Bequests, £126,000.
Pay and allowances and so on, account for 81 per cent of the total Estimates and show an increase of 7 per cent compared with 1985.
In addition to the sum required which I have already outlined, I will also be asking the House for a Supplementary Estimate, which is already before the House, for a sum not exceeding £4,400,000 to defray charges which will come in course of payment in the year ending 31 December 1986 for awards, costs and expenses of the Office of the Minister for Justice in respect of the Stardust compensation tribunal.
The overall Estimates provision for the Garda Síochána in 1986 is £255,273,000. Salaries, allowances and overtime account for almost £198 million of this figure and superannuation provision is close on £35 million. The other major items included are £9.3 million for travelling, subsistence, compensation and miscellaneous expenses, £7.85 million for Garda transport, £4.6 million for postal and telecommunications services and £3.8 million for the purchase, rental and leasing of radio, computer, office and other equipment.
The allocation for salaries and allowances provides for the continuation of Garda recruitment so as to maintain the strength of 11,400 provided for in the national plan. Sixty-eight recruits have been appointed so far this year, a further 100 will be commencing training next Wednesday and further recruitment to fill vacancies is planned for later in the year. Altogether, over 1,400 gardaí have been recruited since the Government took office. This is a substantial achievement at a time when public service numbers generally are being reduced and it is an expression of the Government's continuing commitment to providing the resources necessary to deal with the crime situation.
Garda overtime has been the subject of much exaggerated comment in the press and elsewhere in recent weeks and I think it would be useful to put the matter in perspective on the occasion of this debate. The Estimates provision for Garda overtime in 1986 is £12 million and there is no question of any reduction in this amount. However, because expenditure in the first four months of the year was running at a very high level, the Garda authorities undertook a detailed review of expenditure on overtime so as to ensure that the best possible return is being got from it. This review, together with a general reappraisal of Garda deployment, has led to some changes in the use of resources but the situation is being closely monitored by the Garda authorities so as to ensure that effective policing is maintained in all areas. It is unfortunate that scare headlines and misleading allegations in the press and elsewhere of cutbacks in essential Garda services should give the public the impression that very high expenditure on Garda overtime is a prerequisite to an effective police service. This type of publicity serves only to create a needless sense of insecurity and groundless fears that people and their property are being left without adequate protection.
The fact is that the overtime provision is only one element in the total provision of Garda resources and it would be entirely misleading to regard a high incidence of overtime working, on its own, as any kind of reliable or valid measure of the effectiveness of policing. This is what is important — the provision of an effective policing service that adequately meets requirements on a basis that is cost effective as well. I want to assure the House that I will continue to ensure that the necessary resources are made available to the gardaí, and that all appropriate measures that need to be taken to enable the Garda Síochána to meet the policing needs of the community in an efficient and effective manner will in fact be taken.
A sophisticated new national communications network is being provided at present for the Garda Síochána. The new system is now installed and went "live" in February of this year in all parts of the country other than the Dublin metropolitan area. This new system has brought about a very marked improvement in Garda communications facilities. There is the facility now within each Garda division for instant communication between the divisional headquarters and each district in the division, and between each district and the sub-district stations attached to it. This means that, at practically all times, gardaí and Garda cars on patrol duty within the division are in contact with and contactable from their station. In addition, each Garda division has the facility of instant radio communication with all adjoining Garda divisions. This new system provides for much greater efficiency not alone in the transmission and exchange of information but in the control and utilisation of manpower and patrol cars. It enables an improved service to be provided for the public — for example, in terms of a quicker response by the gardaí to calls for assistance — and of course it also means that any garda in need of help or guidance can seek it from his station instantly by radio.
An important feature of the new network is the provision of radio telephone equipment — what has come to be known as the "Green Man"— at rural Garda stations which are not open round-the-clock. This equipment provides the public with immediate and direct access to the gardaí at times when their local station is closed. This is a very useful feature in areas where station opening times are restricted. It is free of charge and extremely simple to operate and I would encourage people to make good use of it whenever necessary. The second stage of the network installation programme is the radio system for the Dublin metropolitan area.
A £2 million contract was placed in April, 1985 for this system and it is planned that it will come into operation later this year. It includes the most modern type of central control room which will replace the existing central control room in Dublin Castle which is no longer adequate for Garda needs. The radio system will be supplemented by a computerised command and control system which will provide essential management information for the Garda authorities and ensure that the most efficient use is made of all gardaí and patrol cars on operational duties. Similar systems have proved to be of very considerable benefit to police forces in cities abroad and I am confident that it will be of immense value to the gardaí in Dublin. I hope to be in a position to place a contract for this system very shortly.
Over £11 million has been spent to date on the communications network and the amount provided in the current year — £1.62 million — is sufficent to cover leasing repayments on the equipment which it is intended to acquire this year. The continuing allocation of a high level of funds to this project is an example of the Government's commitment to ensuring that the Garda Síochána are provided with the technical resources they require in the vital area of communications.
Computerisation is another area where the benefits of modern technology are being put at the disposal of the gardaí. A new computer costing over £300,000 was provided for the gardaí in December of last year. This has replaced their former model which was no longer adequate to meet the growing needs of the force and the new equipment will facilitate considerable expansion of the computer service available to the Garda Síochána.
Sixty visual display units and ancillary equipment were purchased in 1984 and a contract was placed towards the end of 1985 for a further 45 visual display units and ancillary equipment. This equipment, which has cost over £500,000, has enabled the 18 Garda divisional headquarters and a number of other busy stations both inside and outside the Dublin metropolitan area to be linked directly to the Garda computer. This facility for immediate access to records — for example to check out stolen or suspect vehicles — is proving to be of great practical assistance to the gardaí in dealing with the crime problem.
Work is being carried out at present on improving existing Garda computer systems, such as those dealing with stolen vehicles, firearms and criminals records. A new crime reporting and analysis system has been introduced this year. This is a sophisticated computer system which will provide investigators with information which may help in the solution of particular crimes and will produce analytic reports which will enable particular areas of criminal activity to be explored in depth so that necessary counter measures can be taken. The amount provided for in 1986 — £980,000 — is sufficient to meet the cost of development planned for this year.
Within the past decade the level of serious crime in our society has emerged as a major cause of public concern. Between 1977 and 1981 the level of indictable crime rose by some 42 per cent. The increase continued in 1982 and 1983 but at a lower rate — about 9 per cent and 5 respectively. However, in 1984 — for the first time in six years — national serious crime figures actually, decreased by 2.6 per cent. I am glad to be able to say that this downward trend continued in 1985 with a further reduction of 8.5 per cent and the early indications are that this trend is being maintained so far this year.
There are many causes of increased crime rates and no doubt the reasons for a decrease in crime are complex also. However, there can be no doubt that the efforts of the Garda Síochána, with the full backing of the Government, have played a vital part in bringing about the continued reduction in the amount of indictable crime recorded. I would like to make it absolutely clear that neither I nor the Government think that the battle is won. The level of serious crime must still be viewed as a major problem facing our whole community and there is not the slightest room for complacency in our attitude to the matter. The fight against the criminal must, and will, be vigorously pursued. I can assure the House that the Government are fully committed to giving continued support to the various measures which have already been taken to deal with the situation. I think, nevertheless, that we can take heart from the latest statistics. They are proof that we are moving in the right direction and that measures being taken, with the full support of this Government since assuming office, are beginning to produce the desired results.
I believe we can have confidence that the Garda, given the necessary resources and the support of the community as a whole, can continue to tackle the crime problem successfully. It is right that we should acknowledge and appreciate that special measures taken by the Garda to deal with particular types of crime have been very effective. I have in mind here the measure which were introduced to counter the spate of so-called "joy riding" crimes, to counter the series of reprehensible attacks on elderly people in isolated areas and to deal with drug abuse.
The outbreak of so-called "joy riding" escapades was a feature of Dublin city life early last year. The measures implemented by the Garda to deal with this menace have borne fruit and there is a strong evidence that the Garda are now winning the fight against this particular form of dangerous and wanton lawlessness. A special Garda unit was set up to deal with the problem. A number of vans and cars have been specially deployed and additional custodial accommodation has been provided to ensure that "joy riders" and other criminals will serve the full sentences imposed on them by the courts. Available statistics indicate that the problem of unauthorised takings of cars and rammings of gardaí in patrol cars and on motor cycles has abated considerably in the last 12 months. For the State as a whole there was a decrease of 20 per cent in the number of unauthorised takings of vehicles in 1985 as compared with 1984. As well as that, there has been a further decrease of 15 per cent in the number of unauthorised takings of vehicles in the first four months of 1986, as compared with the same period last year. These are the latest (and still provisional) figures available so there is every reason to hope that the downward trend is set to continue.
The Garda have also been successful in dealing with the heinous attacks on elderly people which were so prevalent in 1984. There was a considerable reduction in the number of recorded attacks on the elderly in 1985, as compared with the previous year. This can be attributed in substantial part to measures devised and taken by the Garda and community groups working together in close co-operation. I should emphasise that this previously unheard-of type of crime presented problems of particular difficulty. I think Deputies will be well aware of the difficulties facing the Garda in affording protection and reassurance for elderly people living in remote and isolated places who were prey to crimes of particular viciousness.
In association with the Community Alert Project, organised by Muintir na Tíre, the Garda authorities introduced certain detailed measures appropriate to each local situation. The number of recorded attacks in 1985 fell by almost 50 per cent compared with the 1984 figure. This, I think, is a fair measure of the success of the strategies adopted to deal with the problem.
We are all aware of the dreadful scourge of drug abuse in our society. The effect which drug abuse has on the crime rate is difficult to measure, but I think there can be little doubt that it makes a bad situation a good deal worse. However, I am glad to be able to say that it is the view of the Garda that the incidence of drug trafficking has levelled off. In this context, it is relevant to make the point that whereas significant increases had been recorded each year in the early 1980s in respect of the number of persons charged with drug offences and the number of drug seizures, the figures for 1985 show a decrease — 7 per cent in the case of the former and a reduction of 4 per cent in the case of the latter. The trend is continuing this year. I believe that these figures are a fair indication of a reduction in the level of offences as the Garda certainly have not relaxed their vigilance in this area. Indeed, more and more gardaí are being trained in the skills necessary to deal with these offences. I am pleased to be in a position to report this improvement to the House. Again, I need hardly say that there is no room for complacency in relation to this most serious problem. Nevertheless, it is heartening to note that the measures which the Government have initiated in recent years are beginning to pay off. I can assure the House that any further steps that are seen by the Government to be necessary to combat the drugs problem will be taken.
The Government's strategy in dealing with the crime situation has not been confined solely to measures to ensure that the Garda Síochána are as effective and efficient as possible in the investigation and detection of criminal activity. The importance of crime prevention has not been overlooked. It is probably true to say that it is only in recent times that the vital role the community can play in the fight against crime has come to be fully recognised.
One crime prevention strategy which is being implemented by the Garda is the neighbourhood watch scheme. Initially, pilot schemes were implemented by the Garda in the Dublin area. These schemes were considered to have a useful role to play not just in relation to crime prevention but also in fostering a closer relationship and understanding between the Garda and the community. The Government allocated funds last year for a publicity campaign to promote neighbour watch with a view to having it implemented as widely as possible throughout the country. The campaign was launched in mid-summer and concentrated on television and radio coverage. I am glad to be in a position to say that this was money well spent. So far there are over 200 schemes in existence involving some 56,723 households throughout the country.
While it is too early yet to come to any definite conclusion as to the effect of neighbour watch schemes on the level and incidence of crime, the preliminary indications are that the schemes are playing a valuable role in this respect. The community relations section of the Garda Síochána have commenced a formal evaluation project on neighbourhood watch to measure the effectiveness of the scheme in reducing crime levels and in fostering improved relations between the Garda and the community. I would like to take this opportunity to commend the Garda Síochána for adopting and promoting this innovative measure to deal with the crime situation and to congratulate the large number of communities who have initiated schemes in their areas.
I come now to the Prisons Vote. The Prisons Estimate reflects the very heavy demands which continue to be made on the prison service, particularly because of the large increases which have taken place in recent years in the number of offenders in custody. The House will be aware that, since coming into office, the Government have been determined to ensure that people convicted of serious offences serve the sentences imposed on them by the Court. The extent of the measures which have been taken to this end can be seen from the size of the increase in the number in costody since 1982. The daily average number in custody in that year was about 1,200. Over the past four years the number has increased by over 50 per cent to about 1,900 at present. To put this increase of about 700 into perspective it should be seen against an increase of only 200 over all of the ten years prior to 1982.
This substantial increase in the number of prisoners being accommodated creates a need, in the short term, for further prison places. We are now taking further measures which will provide the prison system with over 100 extra places over the next few months. These include the acquisition of a new unit in the grounds of the Central Mental Hospital and works to provide additional accommodation at Portlaoise, Mountjoy, Cork and Spike Island. Work is continuing on the new purpose-built place of detention at Wheatfield, and the intended capacity there has been increased to provide accommodation for 320 offenders. This institution, which will be the second largest in the State after Mountjoy, should be completed towards the end of next year for use early the year after.
There are some who have persisted in suggesting that the present accommodation difficulties would not have arisen if the prison capital programme which the Government inherited when they came into office had been proceeded with in its entirety. I would like to make it clear once again that there is simply no basis for that suggestion. The fact of the matter is that under that programme the earliest major additional accommodation which could be made available was the place of detention at Wheatfield. That project has continued without interruption since the Government came into office and, as I have already indicated, the proposed capacity of the institution has been increased. But the earliest moment at which that project could be completed was towards the end of 1987 and there can be no grounds, therefore, for the suggestion that if other parts of the programme had been proceeded with they would have been available to deal with our present needs. It might be argued that it would have been prudent for the Government to proceed with the other parts of the programme to deal with future needs but that is a very different proposition from the misleading one which is normally put forward.
The point about proceeding with the other projects in the capital programme so that they would be available to meet future needs is arguable. The Government, took the view that, while there was a clear need to proceed with the place of detention of Wheatfield, it would not be sensible to proceed with other major projects without first having a thorough review of the entire penal system by a committee of inquiry. In reaching this decision, the Government took into account the enormous costs which would be involved in proceeding with those projects and the likely timescale for their completion — a timescale which meant that they would not be available in the short term to deal with increases in custodial demand which were already taking place.
In the circumstances, the unprecedented increase in the numbers in custody has had to be dealt with, by and large, by maximising the use of existing institutions. This has required considerable resourcefulness on the part of management and staff of the prison service and I am sure that the House will join me in paying tribute to the efforts which the service have been making to cope with these demands.
Increases of the magnitude which have taken place clearly pose severe difficulties for the prison service and I am anxious to take whatever steps are open to me to help alleviate those difficulties. However, the House will accept that the only real alternative to the measures which have been taken to increase custodial accommodation would have been to resort to early releases on a scale which would have had the most serious implications for the operation of the criminal justice system. While there is no doubt that the numbers in custody at present are, in terms of prison administration, undesirably high, the Government, when faced with difficult choices in this area, have to take into account the overriding need to protect society from those who engage in serious crime.
While I do not wish to understate the difficulties facing the prison service it is, nevertheless, the case that the pressure on prison accommodation is by no means unique to our administration and, more importantly, we have been able to cope with it so far without resorting to the type of extreme measures which other administrations have deemed necessary. In particular, every effort is being made to maintain the level of services to offenders despite the increases in the prison population. This approach can be seen from the Prisons Estimate for this year: the provision of £645,000 for manufacturing is almost 90 per cent up on last year's outturn and the provision of £229,000 for educational services, excluding teachers' salaries, is over 30 per cent higher than the 1985 outturn. Having mentioned the difficulties being experienced by other prison administrations, I can inform the House that it is quite common for people from other administrations who visit our prisons to comment favourably on them in the context of the difficulties they face in their own systems.
Again, while not wishing to minimise the extent of our difficulties, it is fair to say that people who attribute all the problems which arise in the prisons solely to pressure on accommodation are adopting an excessively simplistic approach. The reasons, at a given time, for trouble in prisons are, of their nature, very complex and I would caution against a tendency towards superficially plausible, but perhaps ultimately unsustainable, analysis in this area.
Before dealing with some of the detail of this year's Estimate for the prisons I would like to refer fairly briefly to the report of the committee of inquiry into the penal system.
The Report represents the first study of its kind into our penal system and I reiterate the Government's gratitude to all the members who served on the committee and particularly to their chairman, Dr. T.K. Whitaker. Consideration of the report is continuing in my Department and I am in the process of consulting with various groups — mainly groups directly involved in the penal system — about various aspects of the report. I would, of course, welcome also any views which Deputies might wish to communicate to me on the report
While time does not permit me on this occasion to deal with the issues raised in the report in any detail, there is one observation I should make. Since the report was published a number of calls have been made along the lines that it should be implemented immediately and in full. Those calls are, at best, disingenuous and attempt to ascribe to the report a nature which it does not have.
The problems which the committee were asked to examine are very complex. They are problems faced by every democratic society and ones for which there are very few easy or definite answers. The committee advocate certain approaches to these problems and principles which should guide future policy. The committee does not, however, purport to set out a detailed blueprint for the operation of the penal system indicating in precise detail what steps the Government should take in this area. It will be clear to those who study it that the report is of a very different kind. In the circumstances, calls which have been made for the implementation of the report without further clarification and which are made as if they indicated, of themselves, definite and specific actions which I or the Government should take do not amount to much.
Returning to the Prisons Estimate before the House, it will be seen that the largest proportion of expenditure is in respect of the remuneration of prison staff. A sum of £37,143,000 has been provided for salaries, wages and allowances but this will have to be revised later in the year to take into account extra expenditure arising from the continuing high numbers in custody and, more particularly, difficulties which have arisen in relation to certain groups of offenders.
One of the most unwelcome developments in the prisons in the past year has been the need to cater for a number of offenders who have been found to have AIDS antibodies. This has inevitably had implications for staffing levels. The House will be aware that it was decided to segregate offenders in this category principally for two reasons, first, the need to avoid unease among the general prison population and, second, to enable the precautions and restrictions which are medically advised to be applied more easily. A section of Arbour Hill Prison, as well as part of Mountjoy Prison have had to be used exclusively for a number of male offenders with AIDS antibodies. Female offenders with AIDS antibodies are located at present in another part of Mountjoy.
Staffing levels have also had to be increased as a result of additional security measures being taken at Portlaoise Prison since the attempted escape last November by a number of prisoners there. In addition, extra measures involving increases in staffing levels have proved necessary in a number of institutions, notably Mountjoy, to aid better supervision and control of offenders.
The specific problems which I have outlined are among those which have necessitated the deployment of extra staff in order to maintain good order and security. Pending a detailed review of extra staffing requirements — against the background of the Government's policy of restricting numbers in the public service but taking into account the particular demands being made on the prison service — the bulk of the demand for extra staffing has been met, so far, almost exclusively by overtime working. This, particularly when taken in conjunction with the level of overtime dependency inherent in the operation of existing roster arrangements, has led to very heavy demands being made on staff for extra attendance. I am conscious of the undesirability of allowing this situation to continue indefinitely and I have been examining a number of ways in which it might be alleviated.
Both management and staff within the prison service will benefit from the use of Beladd House in Portlaoise as a residential training centre. I had the pleasure of opening the centre some weeks ago and already a number of courses have been held there. A sum of £45,000, exclusive of staff costs, has been provided in this year's Estimates for staff training and development and this will be used to provide training not only for new recruits but also developmental training for prison service personnel at all levels. I feel confident that the investment of these resources will prove to be a wise development and I am sure that the House will join me in wishing this initiative well in its attempt to equip further the prison service to deal more effectively with its responsibilities in a difficult and rapidly changing environment.
Apart from staff costs, the major item of expenditure provided for in the Prisons Estimate for 1986 is the allocation of £12.74 million to the capital programme. The bulk of the money being made available is to enable work to continue at full momentum on the new place of detention at Wheatfield. Site works and enclosure were completed in 1983, construction and servicing of the buildings are now more than half completed and it is expected that the project will be finished on time by the end of 1987.
An extension to Cork Prison, to provide 50 additional cells, commenced last October and is virtually completed. This extension is constructed to the same high standard as the existing modernized cell units and should enable the prison's education unit, which has been temporarily used since last year to provide dormitory accommodation for approximately 30 offenders, to be used again for its original purpose.
Other projects relating to the upgrading of existing custodial accommodation are covered by the capital allocation.
It is perhaps inevitable, given the amounts of money involved, that in speaking on the Prisons Estimate I have concentrated on expenditure incurred on providing and operating places of custody. This should not be taken as any lessening of a desire on the part of the Government to continue to develop effective alternatives to custody.
The major new alternative introduced in recent years has been the community service scheme which was brought into operation at the end of 1984. I am pleased to say that the scheme is being resorted to extensively by the Courts and by the end of last month over 1,000 orders had been made and a further 280 offenders were being assessed for suitability by the probation and welfare service.
Probation is used widely by the Courts and it is my Department's policy to continue to develop its effectiveness as a viable alternative to custody. Towards this end several probation hostels, workships and day centres have been established throughout the country by voluntary committees in association with the probation and welfare service. My Department contribute 100 per cent towards the capital cost of purchasing and refurbishing premises for these projects and up to 90 per cent of their running costs. I am convinced that expenditure in this area is both cost-effective and socially desirable and I think this year's allocation of £1.4 million, compared to an outturn last year of about £1.1 million, is further evidence of the Government's commitment to a wide range of approaches within the penal system.
I now turn to the Courts Vote where I have broad responsibility for providing essential back-up services to enable the Courts to function effectively. My responsibility also extends, of course, to the promotion of legislation relating to the establishment, jurisdiction and functioning of the various Courts and the making of statutory orders under existing legislation. In practical terms, my main concerns are in three areas, namely, courthouse accommodation, the strength of the Judiciary and other matters requiring legislative action, and staffing.
Most Deputies will be aware of difficulties arising in regard to the suitability and adequacy of courthouse accommodation. I am afraid that I still find it necessary to emphasise that responsibility for the provision and maintenance of court accommodation, with certain exceptions in the Dublin area, is vested by law in local authorities. It is apparent that pressures on local finances have affected the level of commitment of some local authorities to maintaining decent court venues.
The picture is not all black, however, and there have been many improvements in recent years in a number of areas. Large scale improvements have been carried out at Waterford, Tralee, Carlow, Ennis, Kilrush, Portlaoise, Roscommon and Wicklow, while Wicklow County Council provided a new purpose-built courthouse at Bray in 1984. Work on the restoration of the fire-damaged courthouse in Monaghan started early in March 1985 and is expected to be completed by August next. Leitrim County Council are considering the possibility of providing a new courthouse at Carrickon-Shannon. Other local authorities are dealing with less extensive works on an ongoing basis.
The current major concern is the restoration of Cavan courthouse. For financial reasons work on this project was delayed by Cavan County Council. However, acting on an order of mandamus made by the High Court, I issued a direction to the Commissioners for Public Works at the end of January to effect the necessary repairs as provided for in section 6 (1) (a) of the Courthouses (Provision and Maintenance) Act, 1935. I understand that Cavan County Council have since indicated that they are now prepared to proceed with a scheme for the reconstruction of the courthouse to include court and county council requirements. In doing so they would be acting as agents for the OPW for the court element of the work.
In Dublin within the past few years nine additional courtrooms have been made available for the various courts.
I do not intend to go into this matter in detail but I would like to point out that the new Children's Court complex will provide generous waiting and consultation facilities, conference rooms and duty rooms for probation and welfare officers. The plans include two courtrooms and judges' rooms, a retiring room for solicitors, and separate waiting areas for gardaí, witnesses and members of the public. Deputies will be aware that the money necessary to build the permanent Children's Court is being provided from the dormant funds of suitors in the High Court under the Funds of Suitors Act, 1984.
In the few minutes I have left, I would like to deal with a few of the other aspects of the Courts Vote before the House. As far as staffing is concerned, court officers have had to cope with staff shortages arising from the restrictions on Civil Service recruitment in common with most other State services. In some cases, lack of staff combined with increasing workloads has given rise to problems. I am glad to say that the assignment from November last of 56 temporary clerical trainees to court offices has helped to alleviate some of the problems. In addition, it was found possible to have special arrangements made for a few offices where the effect of the embargo was becoming critical. Among these were the High Court, particularly the central office and the probate office.
One area where staff shortages and increased workloads had brought about unacceptable delays was in the issuing of fines warrants. Deputies will be aware that the Committee on Crime, Lawlessness and Vandalism raised this issue last year. Various claims were made at the time about the value of the unissued warrants. An informal survey carried out in my Department last September showed that some 115,000 warrants with an estimated face value of £4.25 million were outstanding. Computerisation, the assignment of temporary clerical trainees and special staff effort where this was possible helped to reduce the arrears by the end of the year to about 76,000 warrants with an estimated face value of £3.4 million. Further inroads have been made into the arrears since then. It is important to appreciate, of course, that at the best of times there will be a volume of unissued warrants representing an irreducible level of work in progress.
It is intended to extend computerisation in court offices. This will bring about a greater degree of modernisation of court work and will also help to offset the effects of staff shortages. A computer system is already in operation in the Dublin metropolitan district. It has proved most successful in processing a large volume of summonses and warrants. Statistics for the Garda Commissioner's crime report are also compiled on this computer and as a consequence there have been significant savings for court staff and the Garda Síochána.
The build-up of delays, especially in Cork, in the hearing of High Court jury actions and in Circuit Court criminal and civil business, is a cause of concern. The time taken to dispose of High Court civil actions at present is about 12 months, with the exception of Cork where the delay has been as high as 30 months. Following special steps taken by the President of the High Court, including extra court sittings, the delay there has been reduced to about 26 months. It is hoped that this will be reduced to 24 months by the end of the year. There are no delays in the hearing of non-jury common law actions. Circuit Court business in Cork has increased substantially since 1979 and this has inevitably affected the speed with which cases have been disposed of. The president of the Circuit Court is doing all that is possible to reduce the arrears and has assigned a second judge to Cork on a full time basis.
The Presidents of the High Court and Circuit Court have been helped in arranging additional sittings by the appointment by the Government early this year of an additional judge to each court which was made possible following the legislation I mentioned earlier.
I wish to make some brief comments about three matters which are covered by the Vote of the Office of the Minister for Justice, viz., compensation for victims of the Stardust fire, legal aid and law reform.
Almost £8 million has been paid cut in awards in 400 cases by the Stardust victims compensation tribunal. In addition £0.6 million has been paid in respect of legal and other expenses. Of the £8.6 million million spent so far £0.8 million was spent in 1985 and £7.8 million has been spent this year to date.
As was stated in this House by my immediate predecessor, the reason the Stardust victims compensation tribunal was set up by the Government was to bring to a speedy end the difficulties that obtained in relation to compensation for victims of that tragedy. The tribunal commenced work last October and it has dealt expeditiously with all claims made to it since then. An indication of the satisfaction felt by the victims with the work of the tribunal is that to date only one award has been turned down by an applicant.
The original closing date for the receipt of applications by the tribunal was 31 January 1986. Representations were made in recent months, however, that not all applicants had been able to submit their claims to the tribunal by that date. Accordingly, it was decided in the middle of last month that there should be a new closing date. Notices were put in the newspapers to the effect that a new closing date of 20 June 1986 would apply.
It is not clear yet what the exact total cost of awards made by the tribunal will be. What is clear, however, is that the provision in this year's Estimate of £5 million is inadequate. In fact, as I have mentioned already, £7.8 million has already been paid out this year. On the basis of the information now available it would appear that £9.4 million will be required this year. Accordingly, the House is being asked to approve a Supplementary Estimate of £4.4 million for the Vote of the Office of the Minister for Justice.
The 1986 provision for civil legal aid is £1,552,000. Although this allocation will not, of itself, allow for any expansion of the board's services the board have been able to open three additional Law Centres, a second centre at Cork and centres at Tralee and Athlone in recent months, and intend to open a fourth centre at Tallaght shortly. These centres will be financed until the end of 1987 from the moneys available for civil legal aid under a provision in the Funds of Suitors Act, 1984.
I introduced substantial improvements in the means test provisions in the civil legal aid scheme with effect from 29 May last. Details of the changes were announced in the usual way and copies of the amended scheme have been laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas. The changes are designed to restore the position regarding eligibility for services under the scheme to what was intended when the scheme was introduced in 1980, and to extend further the improvements made since then for applicants who are in receipt of social welfare payments.
