Vol. 511 No. 3
30 Mr. Higgins (Mayo) asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the cumulative mileage of the members of the Mountjoy visiting committee; the numbers of ordinary meetings and special meetings held between January and July 1998; the cost of each meeting in terms of travelling costs and subsistence; the reason for the meetings; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24246/99]
I assume the Deputy's request for the cumulative mileage of the members of the Mountjoy visiting committee relates to the period January to July 1998. Should the Deputy require details of the cumulative mileage for a period other than that, I will provide them at a later stage.
The cumulative mileage of the members of the Mountjoy visiting committee for the period January to July 1998 was 12,883 miles. It would not be possible to determine the cost of individual meetings without substantial uses of staff resources and time, given that it would involve the extraction and examination of each claim. In this regard, it should be noted that some visiting committee members submit claims monthly while others submit them less frequently, putting several claims on one form. However, the following data has been gleaned from the financial management system relating to travel and subsistence payments to the members of the Mountjoy visiting committee in respect of the period 1 January to 31 July 1998.
The total travel costs for the Mountjoy visiting committee for the period in question was £8,770 and the total subsistence paid was £1,489.37. This translates to an average of £974.44 in travel costs and £165.49 in subsistence payments for each meeting. I should point out that visiting committee members do not receive any remuneration. Travel and subsistence allowances are paid in line with Civil Service rates.
The composition of visiting committees is drawn from a wide geographical area to help to ensure that the diverse needs of prisoners are understood and met. This is the long-standing practice used by successive Ministers in appointing members of prison visiting committees. Moreover, previous visiting committees have generated similar levels of travelling expenses etc. to the membership of the committee referred to in the Deputy's question.
There were seven ordinary meetings and two special meetings of the Mountjoy visiting committee between January and July 1998. The seven ordinary meetings were held to carry out the normal functions and duties of the committee. These functions and duties are provided for in the Prisons (Visiting Committee) Act, 1925, and the Prisons (Visiting Committee) Order, 1925.
Additional Information.
These include: to visit the prison at frequent intervals and to hear complaints which may be made to them by any prisoner; to report to me any abuses observed or found by them in the prison and to report to me any repairs which they think may be urgently needed. The visiting committee has free access, either collectively or individually, to every part of their prison. In inspecting prisons, the visiting committee focuses on issues such as quality of accommodation, catering, medical, educational and welfare services and recreational facilities.
Two special meetings were held by the committee to prepare their annual report for 1997 for submission to me, as required under the Prisons (Visiting Committee) Act, 1925.
(Mayo): How can the Minister stand over a system, albeit a long-standing one, where the main monitoring unit for monitoring the performance of the prison system and the membership thereof is basically decided by virtue of a person's political affiliations? Membership is in no way related to a person's competence, skills, ability or training. In a prison system which is in chaos, there is an absolute need for professional monitoring carried out by people competently trained with suitable qualifications to carry out this task. Does the Minister agree it is high time to change the system, and I am not being political in this regard?
The prison system is not in crisis – far from it. We have embarked on the most ambitious—
Crisis. What crisis?
—prison building project in the history of the State. That much is well known. We are well on the way to providing at least an additional 1,000 prison spaces by the end of the year, which is a marvellous performance in the lifetime of this Government.
Open another few prisons.
The position in relation to the visiting committees is simple. People are not selected willy-nilly but on the basis of their capabilities. They are also selected to ensure a geographic spread. It is obviously in the interests of the prisoners that there is a vibrant visiting committee – there is in Mountjoy and I venture to suggest in other prisons as well. Successive Ministers for Justice have appointed good people to these committees and the work done by them should not be denigrated in the manner Deputy Higgins seemed to do.
I advise the House that we cannot stray into an area which anticipates tonight's discussion.
We can draw the curtains for half an hour, a Cheann Comhairle.
(Mayo): This is carrying the literal interpretation of the Standing Order too far. I will not stray into tonight's debate anyhow.
Does the Minister accept it is ludicrous that people who have no qualifications are being hauled – and are paid for – from Donegal to Cork, if they are members of the Cork visiting committee or from Cahirciveen in Kerry to Leitrim, if they are members of the Loughan House, County Leitrim, visiting committee? Does he accept it is high time to introduce some fundamental regulations? Some 90% of the prison population in Mountjoy, for example, comes from the Dublin area. Therefore, people from within the Dublin catchment area should be on that visiting committee. Will the Minister not set down, as a binding regulation, that the membership of visiting committees for all prisons should be confined to people from within a 70 miles radius?
The position is clear. Prisoners in prisons can come from any part of the country and it is only appropriate that people on the visiting committees come from various parts of the country. That was the position under the previous Minister and those before her. In regard to the location of the people concerned, there is a good geographical spread. I have no doubt there was one or two people from Ballina on the prison visiting committees when Deputy Higgins was Government Chief Whip. I am glad he is not going to wander into tonight's discussion. I remind him that it is a long day's journey into night.
(Mayo): I will see the Minister tonight.
