Vol. 382 No. 7
asked the Minister for Justice the action he intends to take following the death on 13 June 1988, of a prisoner in Mountjoy Prison, the second such death in little over two months; whether an inquiry into prison deaths is required; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
19.
asked the Minister for Justice if he will hold a public inquiry into the alarming number of deaths that have taken place in our prisons in the last two years.
22.
asked the Minister for Justice if he will order an inquiry into the circumstances of the death of a 29-year-old prisoner in Mountjoy Prison on 13 June 1988; if, in view of the fact that this is the second apparent suicide in Mountjoy within two months and the 13th prison death within three years, he has satisfied himself with the level of supervision of prisoners and the standard of medical psychiatric services available in the prisons; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
23.
asked the Minister for Justice if his Department or any other body have carried out research into deaths which have taken place in prison in recent years; if so, the common factors, if any, there are in such deaths; his views on whether there are appropriate methods of preventing such deaths occurring in future; and if no such research has been carried out, if he will initiate it, having regard to the public's unease about these deaths.
31.
asked the Minister for Justice if he will outline the circumstances under which a recent suicide death occurred in Mountjoy Prison, Dublin 7; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 10, 19, 22, 23 and Priority Question No. 31 together.
All deaths which take place in custody are the subject of a public inquiry in the form of an inquest and I do not consider that any form of public inquiry beyond that would be warranted. As an inquest on the most recent death at Mountjoy is pending, it would not be appropriate for me to comment in any way on the circumstances in which this death occurred.
Since 1 January 1985 nine offenders have died in prison custody and no useful statistical or other pattern is discernible in the deaths which have occurred. Obviously all of these deaths are a matter of the deepest concern and regret.
There is no evidence to suggest that the level of supervision of prisoners or the standard of psychiatric services available in the prisons were factors in the deaths which occurred. Every effort is made by the prison authorities to indentify offenders who may be at risk and where such offenders are identified they are given special attention by prison staff so as to minimise the risk of self-injury. Such attention can entail, for example, checking on the safety of an offender every 15 or 20 minutes throughout the night.
Vigilance on the part of prison staff and those who work in the support services at the institutions clearly has a key part to play in this matter. However, it has to be accepted that there is no foolproof way by which all potential suicide victims can be identified.
Reports of all deaths in prison are examined by governors and in my Department to see whether the circumstances indicate any pattern or suggest any procedure or course of action that might have proved helpful in the particular case or that might usefully be introduced in a effort to forestall similar tragedies.
It has to be accepted, however, that where an offender is determined to take his or her life, and not infrequently there is no prior warning of any such intent, there are limits to what the prison authorities can reasonably do. Our experience in this matter is similar to that of other prison administrations.
I can assure the House that the procedures for identifying and providing for offenders at risk are kept under continuous review and all measures which can reasonably be taken to help in any particular case are taken immediately.
Deputy Gregory rose.
Because of the lack of co-operation from Deputies earlier, Deputy Gregory, you are not permitted under Standing Orders to ask a question.
On a point of order, given that Question No. 10 on the same subject matter as Question No. 31, may I ask the Minister a supplementary question? In view of the fact that there have been 13 deaths in our prisons since 1980 and four this year——
I appreciate the Deputy's concern and it was in deference to the Deputy's concern that I put a request to the House that Members would co-operate. Let me quote Standing Order 40 to the Deputy:
Supplementary Questions may be put only for the further elucidation of the information requested, and shall be subject to the ruling of the Ceann Comhairle, both as to relevance and as to number: Provided that in the time allocated to Questions nominated for priority, supplementary Questions may be put only by the Member in whose name the Question appears on the Order Paper.
Therefore, Deputy Barrett is the only person who is now entitled to ask supplementary questions.
As Deputy Barrett has indicated that he is agreeable——
Deputy Barrett is not the interpreter of Standing Orders and I noted he invited the Deputy to ask a question which was not his——
I thought you were calling——
The Deputy did not agree to it.
I did not disagree.
The Deputy's party and Deputy Taylor continued to insist that they be allowed to ask questions notwithstanding the fact that they had been advised of what I would have to do.
I understood you to call Question No. 10.
May I ask a question with the agreement of the House?
Deputy Gregory will appreciate that if individual Members or groups of Members of the House were to interpret Standing Orders we would not make very much progress.
By way of implication or otherwise, it is a bit unfair to put the responsibility either on Deputy Noonan or on me. I point out——
That is where it lies.
Nine questions were answered and I would point out that Questions No. 11 and 17 in my name were also not reached. Therefore, you should not place fault on just one or two Deputies. If there is a fault, it is the fault of us all, including the Chair perhaps.
I reject and resent that comment in so far as at 3.28 p.m. I indicated to the Deputy and to Deputy Noonan that if they were going to insist on asking supplementary questions, and the record will show this, I would end up adjourning the House for ten minutes. The Deputy must accept culpability in respect of denying other Deputies the opportunity to ask questions.
We do not accept that.
On a point of order, am I correct in saying that the Minister in his reply to Question No 31 seems to have included Questions Nos. 10 and 23?
I understand that if the Minister took Question No. 10 he would also have included other questions. As Question No. 10 was not reached we were obliged under Standing Orders to proceed to Question No. 31. I now call on Deputy Barrett to ask supplementary questions.
In view of the number of suicides which have occurred in our prisons in the recent past, would the Minister not agree that something radical needs to be done, such as providing a proper medical back-up service in our prisons? Would he also not agree that the present arrangements are totally inadequate? It is not an accident that so many deaths have occurred as a result of suicide in the recent past. Therefore, there is an obligation on us to make the appropriate changes and the necessary appointments in this area.
I regret very much the tone of the Deputy's supplementary question because we do have appropriate medical facilities and staff and we are very thankful for the work which they are doing.
What about the appointment of a medical director?
I will deal with that question if the Deputy will allow me to do so. First of all, let me say that this House and this country owes a deep debt of gratitude to those working in the medical services in the prison service.
The Deputy has asked me a question. Will he please give me an opportunity to answer it.
The Minister does not reply to anything we ask him.
If the Deputy does not want me to answer it, I can sit down.
Deputy Barrett is in a rather privileged position in so far as——
I am not going to be lectured. I am entitled to ask questions.
We know you are. I will give the Deputy ample opportunity to ask more questions.
Having placed on the record of the House my appreciation of the medical staff for the job which they are doing successfully in the prison service——
I also appreciate it.
——I now want to reply to the question. Even though we had two competitions organised by the Civil Service Commission for a full-time doctor with the title of medical director, both competitions failed to produce a suitable candidate and as a result it was decided to give a role to the Chief Medical Officer for the Civil Service in overseeing the medical services of the prison. This was possible because the Chief Medical Officer's workload had been reduced as a result of the hiving-off of the Post Office from the Civil Service. The Chief Medical Officer has been discharging his role in relation to the prisons and there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that the deaths which have taken place could have been avoided if a full time medical director was employed.
Research into the deaths which have taken place is carried out, as I outlined in my reply, by the Department who consider a report on each death in an attempt to indentify any action which might have been taken which might have lessened the risk of a particular case. Regard is also had to previous cases so as to identify patterns of behaviour in which the deaths occur and measures which can be reasonably taken are taken immediately. It is hard to see what further research, beyond that which is already being carried out at present in the Department, could be expected to achieve.
Inquests have yet to take place into the three most recent deaths in Mountjoy. I have to wait until such time as these inquests are completed before it will be appropriate for me to make any comment on the circumstances in which the deaths occurred. Regrettably, deaths in prisons are a feature with which prison administrations internationally have to contend. The level of deaths which occur in our prisons is not out of line with international trends, such as in Britain and the Netherlands, and the latter is regarded as having a very progressive penal system. Some of the deaths which have occurred have been drug-related and successive Ministers have pointed out that while every reasonable effort is made to prevent illicit drugs getting into prisons the difficulty lies, as my predecessors can assure this House if they want to, in striking the right balance between measures to control drug trafficking and the need to preserve a human regime in the prison.
With regard to the recent death in Mountjoy, has the Minister found out who broke Mr. Ryan's arm before he died?
Question No. 32.
