Vol. 378 No. 2
asked the Minister for Justice the number of gardaí involved in the special surveillance operation on suspected criminals; if he will report on the progress made by this Garda squad to date in preventing and detecting crime; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
36.
asked the Minister for Justice if he will make a statement regarding the efforts being made by the Garda in relation to the activities of armed gangs in the Dublin area in the light of revelations in a recent media report (details supplied).
I propose to take Question No. 16 and Priority Question No. 36 together.
It is not the practice for Ministers for Justice to make statements to the House about the progress of specific Garda operations except in singular instances where the circumstances of an operation are so exceptional that such a course is deemed to be appropriate. In general terms, I can say that the Garda authorities have informed me that a number of measures have been introduced to counter the problems of armed crime. These involve the redeployment of certain Garda resources and a continual review of the levels of protection to be provided at particular times and places, as well as other matters. I do not intend to go into any further detail about these measures. Garda efforts might well be adversely affected were I to do so. There are indications that the measures being taken by the Garda are proving to be effective. The Garda authorities have informed me that the provisional crime figures for 1987 indicate a significant decrease in the number of armed raids in that year as compared with the figures for 1986.
Would the Minister agree that the material shown on the "Today Tonight" programme was a matter of exceptional importance to the House? Will the Minister comment on what appears to be a new development in which a sort of preventive action is being taken with a massive input of Garda resources in surveillance for preventive purposes rather than remedial purposes? Is that not something which should be considered by the Minister and the House, as to whether that is the best possible use of massive resources to prevent crime rather than to track down crime already committed? Will the Minister comment on the question of why, if there is evidence against this man he is not prosecuted, rather than absorbing such a huge amount of Garda resources?
We should not dwell on any particular case.
Does the Deputy think it superfluous? What was the Deputy's last comment?
A total of 70 gardaí, according to the report were involved on a rota basis in this preventive operation.
Having regard to the fact that Deputy Taylor is suggesting that because the subject matter of these questions has received so much publicity in the media, I should depart from the normal practice and be somewhat more specific about certain Garda operations, I must say that I have thought about the matter very carefully and I have taken a considered decision that the interests of the prevention and detection of serious crime would not be served by making a statement to the House about the nature, extent and progress of any particular Garda operation being conducted at present to deal with armed crime. There appears to be no good reason the practice referred to in my reply should be departed from. The programme that the media put out is their business, my responsibilities are different and I am answerable in the House.
Will it continue?
What the Minister is saying in effect is that this matter can go out to the entire country in great detail on a television network but we in the House who have responsibility ultimately for this matter to our constituents are to be given a glib ministerial Civil Service type answer saying that it cannot be discussed here in the House.
I reject the comment of "glib answer". I have given the Deputy a straight answer and he, being a member of the legal profession, should fully appreciate the reasons for my answer. The Deputy should also appreciate that it is not my function to decide what does or does not go out on an RTE programme. I have explained the position quite clearly to the House——
Television is more relevant than the House.
Certainly not. The Deputy should not tie himself up in knots about this sort of thing.
That is the thrust of what you are saying.
It is not. The Deputy is sinking himself with this. The answer I have given is more than adequate.
That must be the end of questions, both ordinary questions and those nominated for priority for today.
Will the surveillance continue?
That is entirely a Garda matter. It is an operational matter.
I am resuming on other business.
Deputy Taylor has had problems with television recently.
I am resuming on the budget debate.
