Vol. 496 No. 4
4 Mr. Higgins (Mayo) asked the Taoiseach if his attention has been drawn to the fact that the preparation of files for the Director of Public Prosecutions is inadequate in view of the increased volume of work imposed on State solicitors; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22395/98]
I am not aware of any deterioration in the preparation of files for the Director of Public Prosecutions, the essentials of which are assembled by the Garda Síochána in any event.
As regards the workload of State solicitors, a review of a number of aspects of the service, including the actual and comparative workloads, has been undertaken recently. This was in response to a suggestion in the report of the Review Group of the Law Offices of the State and representations from the State Solicitors' Association.
(Mayo): There has been a threat, not a suggestion, on the part of a number of the 32 State solicitors to resign from their jobs. Is the Taoiseach aware that a high profile fraud and conversion case against a Limerick financial services operator was recently dismissed in a Limerick court because the Limerick State solicitor was unable to prepare the book of evidence in time? Is he aware that the same solicitor warned the DPP last February that his workload was so intolerable and impossible that a crisis was imminent? This solicitor had prepared 50 Garda files for the previous November to July. Some of these cases involved drug trafficking or murder and it was inevitable that cases would be thrown out unless emergency funding was made available.
A review is taking place on this issue. The terms of reference of the review are to report on the following aspects of the local State solicitors' services: the actual and comparative workloads of State solicitors and the need for a rationalisation of State solicitor areas; arrangements for meeting the costs of support staff and general expenses; the need for special arrangements for remunerating State solicitors in respect of fisheries cases and any increase in workloads which have occurred in recent years.
That work is nearing completion and meetings have already taken place with the State Solicitors' Association. I am sure the report will be followed up once published. It will be divided into three sections: personal salary, payment in respect of support staff and expenses. The review will report shortly and the solicitors will have to make their case.
(Mayo): Does the Taoiseach not recognise that a crisis exists and that something should be done pending the review? Does he not agree that there is not much point in increasing funds for the defence if he does not make a commensurate increase in funding for the prosecution? Does he not see that there is not much point in gardaí doing excellent detective work, arraigning, charging and prosecuting people, only to have the cases thrown out? There is a large and growing burden of work involving health and safety, sex offences, and agriculture cases, such as the use of angel dust. It is time we looked at the possibility of appointing State solicitors on a full-time basis so that this work would be their sole occupation.
I am aware the local State solicitor service is staffed by very dedicated people and I do not believe many cases are thrown out, although there may be some isolated ones. Negotiations led to the setting up of a review group and the group's recommendations will be available in the near future. There is no case for making increases prior to the report of the review group which is already in draft form. I am not sure what areas have been highlighted most, but the terms of reference set up in consultation with the group will ensure the issues outlined by the Deputy are covered. The State solicitor from Limerick is a member of the three man review group and I am sure a good case was made on behalf of members of the local State solicitor service.
(Mayo): Will the recommendations be published?
I understand they are near completion and will be discussed openly with the association.
It is almost 25 years since the office of the DPP was established and no review of the office has been carried out. We are now living in a climate where freedom of information is taken for granted and is accepted as being of extreme importance. Does the Taoiseach agree that while there is a need on the one hand to protect the independence of the office, there is also a need for certain decisions to be justified and a certain amount of transparency? Does the Taoiseach agree that consideration should be given to arranging an annual visit by the DPP to a committee of this House to deal with matters which are causing concern in relation to decisions which have been taken?
The Deputy should be mindful of the independence of the DPP.
I accept his independence and have acknowledged it.
A fundamental review of the DPP's office was carried out by the former Attorney General, Mr. Gleeson, in 1996. Some aspects of the review have not been fully completed at this stage, one of which relates to the publication of an annual report. The current Director is very anxious to see that finalised and the report coming before the House. Some other aspects of the review are being implemented by the Attorney General. The Deputy will be aware that the Attorney General made a speech recently which hinted at some of the issues which might be considered.
