Vol. 428 No. 5
10 Mr. Cox asked the Minister for Justice if a decision was taken by the previous Government to the effect that the cost of maintaining courthouse accommodation in Ireland would henceforth be defrayed from central funds rather than as a charge on the rates as is provided for under section 13 of the Courthouses (Provisions and Maintenance) Act, 1935; and, if so, the sums, if any, which have been provided from central funds since that decision was taken.
In March 1990 the Government decided that local authorities should be relieved of the financial burden of providing and maintaining courthouses and that the cost should in future be borne by the Exchequer subject to a limit to be agreed annually between the Minister for Finance and the Minister for Justice.
A sum of £3.2 million was provided for this purpose in the 1991 Estimates. This provision was reduced to £1 million in the Financial Review of July 1991. A sum of £1.25 million was provided for each of the years 1992 and 1993.
Because of budgetary constraints, it has not been possible to defray the costs incurred by local authorities in maintaining courthouses and the capital building programme for courthouses has been restricted to those areas where need was greatest.
A number of courthouses throughout the country require renovation. Because of the limited availability of financial resources, priorities are being established in my Department between the different premises requiring attention. Progress has not been as rapid as I would like it to be but I am confident that the next few years will see substantial improvement in the standard of court accommodation throughout the country.
Will the Minister of State agree that the facilities in courthouses are an absolute disgrace, unlike the facilities in most Garda stations which, thankfully, are among the best in Europe? The vociferous campaign pursued by the Garda Síochána ten-15 years ago has borne fruit. Similar provisions have not been made for courthouse accommodation. Even basic facilities are not available in courthouses. Will he agree that this is unacceptable? Will he further agree that where a facility cannot be made available in a courthouse, some consultant facility should be provided for litigants and their legal representatives so that they do not have to continue to meet in the backs of cars outside courthouses, etc., which happens in many cases at present? Finally, will he agree that £1.25 million will not do much to solve the problem given the very bad existing conditions? Does he have any estimate of what it might cost to bring our courtroom accommodation up to the standard which is normal throughout the rest of Europe?
In regard to the last part of the Deputy's question, judging by the number of requests in the Department, expenditure of £12 million would be required to improve courtroom facilities. With regard to the other parts of the Deputy's question, much of the courthouse accommodation badly needs to be upgraded. Nobody will deny this. Part of the problem arises from the fact that many of these courthouses were built during the last century — this has certainly exacerbated the problem. With regard to the Deputy's point that £1.2 million is inadequate to deal with the problem, of course we would like to have more money to spend on courthouses but this is the amount which has been voted by the Government. I would remind Deputy Harney that the decision taken in 1990 which restricted the initial allocation from £3.2 million to £1 million was taken by a Cabinet which included two members of her party. This might be another example of the so-called "12 to two votes", but my information is otherwise. The Cabinet at the time, which included Deputy O'Malley and Deputy Molloy, decided, first, that the obligation should be shifted to the Central Exchequer — I agree with that decision — and that, second, they could not meet the obligation imposed on them by that decision. I am sure that their intentions were good and that they intended to proceed as quickly as possible along the line of full Exchequer funding for these purposes. That was the intention of the Government which included Deputy Molloy and Deputy O'Malley, and it is also the intention of this Government.
Does the Minister not feel precluded by the constitutional decision in relation to confidentiality in that he has given me details of Cabinet decisions? I was not trying to exonerate members of my party or to make a political partisan statement about this matter. Successive Governments over a long number of years have not regarded the administration of justice in our courthouse accommodation as a priority. Will the Minister agree that the recent very expensive renovations at, for example, Letterkenny courthouse, were not sufficient? Apparently it has now been found that the jury room is not soundproof. Will he agree that when changes of this kind are being made at great expense to the taxpayer they should be appropriate?
Yes, changes of that nature will be a priority in any future building or refurbishment programmes carried out by the Department of Justice. The Government believes that the sum of £1.25 million which will be provided in 1993 will be sufficient to allow us to proceed with the Cork and Galway projects. As the Deputy will be aware, there are particular problems in relation to the courthouses in Carrick-on-Shannon, Clonmel and Drogheda.
What about Letterkenny courthouse?
An extensive refurbishment programme was undertaken at Letterkenny courthouse in recent times. In view of the scarce resources available to us, Letterkenny has not done badly in this area.
One of the rooms in the courthouse is not soundproof.
I am confident that we will be able to sort out the problems in the court houses in Clonmel and Drogheda. We are involved in discussions with the local authorities for the Carrick-on-Shannon area.
The Minister of State referred to the project in Cork. Does this relate to the existing courthouse or to building the new courthouse in Anglesea Street?
As Deputy Barry is probably aware, the Department is equipping a new building in Cork to add to the existing facilites there and it is hoped——
The Minister of State said that the project in Cork would commence this year. Does this relate to the new building in Anglesea Street or to the refurbishment of the existing courthouse in Washington Street?
Both, I hope.
Let us proceed to Question No. 11. A final question from Deputy Mary Harney.
I wish to make a point which has been brought to my attention by legal practitioners. If a jury is asked to be removed from the court because the judge and counsel wish to discuss a certain point, the intention is that the jury would not be able to hear that discussion. Therefore, a soundproof room must be provided. Despite the modern renovations at Letterkenny courthouse it does not have a soundproof room. Planners need to be consulted when improvements are being carried out to courtroom accommodation to ensure that the facilities are appropriate.
This defect in Letterkenny courthouse has not been brought to my attention and I thank the Deputy for doing so. I shall have the matter investigated as a matter of urgency. I agree with the Deputy that, of course, the jury room needs to be soundproofed.
