Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Friday, 21 Feb 1930

Vol. 33 No. 6

Private Deputies' Business. - Adjournment Debate—Mountjoy Prison Visiting Committee.

Mr. Little

Arising out of the reply to my question No. 4 on yesterday's Order Paper with regard to Mountjoy Prison Visiting Committee, I raise the question now because of the seriousness of the matter involved and because of the unsatisfactory nature of the answer given by the Minister. A breach of a pledge of this kind is a very serious matter indeed to members of this House. The Minister should remember that we represent almost one-half of the people of this country, and that he gave that pledge to us. Having given that pledge he should have honoured it. By not having honoured it he shows he is not a man of honour, and his attitude is not consonant with the spirit of the Constitution. He has not acted in the spirit in which a member of the Executive should act in carrying out the orders of this House, which is supposed to be a sovereign assembly. The House as a whole is the master. If one member of this House makes an agreement and as a member of the Executive he made that agreement with the Chief Opposition Party, it is a gross breach of honour both from the Constitutional point of view as well as the individual point of view to break that agreement, which was given as a written undertaking.

The best way to safeguard the interests of the prisoners and to secure their proper treatment would be to have a proper visiting committee. I do not object to Deputy Doyle being on the committee. I do not object to a man who is not a business man and who is a politician being on the committee, provided that on the committee there is someone of a corresponding kind from the Opposition. Such persons on the committee would learn a great deal about the treatment of ordinary criminal prisoners, a matter that is outside the sphere of political controversy. It would be of great value to this House if the members of such a committee watched the treatment of prisoners with a view to improving legislation with regard to them and keeping a certain check on the permanent officials, so that the criminals and political prisoners might feel there was the check of some tribunal to which they could appeal for fair-play. No matter how good a system may be for administering justice, permanent officials are apt to take matters into their hands from time to time. It is absolutely necessary to have control over them of this kind. The Minister has proved that he is not able to control his own Department. Here was a promise given in writing by him——

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

Read the promise.

Mr. Little

It is not necessary to read the promise again.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

Will the Deputy read it?

Mr. Little

The substance of the promise is——

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

You will not read it?

Mr. Little

It is not necessary to read the document for we agreed that the names of certain men, business men if you like, were to be put forward. One man was a business man, and then there was myself. I am a solicitor but I regard solicitors as being in the nature of business men. If there was a difficulty about that the Minister could have raised an objection in correspondence, and he certainly would have been supplied with another list completely complying with the requirements he put forward, but that was not the real reason as he states from the answer. The reason put forward and which precludes him from giving any answer to the end of my question and from doing now what he agreed to do before is he contends the attitude of our Party.

What is the attitude of the Party? We asked for the facts to be stated on which he based the charge that the attitude of this Party was such that he could not carry out his agreement. An absolute refusal is all we get from the Minister, and he will not give us any facts because he knows he is talking through his hat, finding any excuse he can, in order to conform to the orders given to him by his permanent officials. He will not carry out the agreement, and he gives an excuse which is almost as lame as the excuse he gave when he said with regard to a man in Clare injured by violence by a member of his force that he had got a kick from a cow.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

I did not say that. I stated the facts as to what happened, and mentioned that he was knocked down by a cow. That is exactly what occurred.

Mr. Aiken

It is not what occurred, and the Minister knows it damn fine.

Mr. Little

I merely mentioned that as a typical example of what occurs. In this case it is we who are protecting the rights of citizens in this House. It is we who try to create some sense of respect and dignity for the law by protecting the rights of individuals. When we do so the Minister in his violent-minded way adopts an attitude as if he were Chief Secretary for an alien Parliament ruling natives, and not one acting among his equals, a member of the Executive carrying out the orders of a sovereign Parliament. It is necessary that we should have some representative on the Visiting Committee because of certain misunderstandings and unfortunate things that have happened recently. The conduct of the authorities in the prison has changed suddenly and for unaccountable reasons. Certain persons are being treated differently now to what they were. At first they were given association separate from other prisoners. That was changed, and out of that arose the situation that we have five men in solitary confinement and two of them are in ill-health.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

There is no one in solitary confinement.

Mr. Little

Yes, they are still in solitary confinement.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

No.

Mr. Little

We could go on contradicting each other on this point. We believe the facts we have and the Minister believes the facts he has. Russell and Fitzgerald were sentenced in December. They were given freedom of association for a fortnight, and then for some unknown reason their treatment was changed. If we had someone representing our point of view, or representing the Opposition Party in the Dáil, on that Committee we would be in a position to investigate the circumstances at first hand, remove certain misunderstandings and give these people the opportunity of stating their case, so that there would be in some way a check on the violent methods of the people in the prison, and who still seem to suffer like the C.I.D. forces under the Minister from the bug of civil war, to use the words Deputy O'Sullivan used yesterday when he talked of the anti-army bug. It is time that this obsession that everything must be met with violence, that pledges can be broken and violence can be used, inside and outside the jail, was removed, and that the Minister should take up another attitude and do something to end this embitterment, because there is nothing which is creating such an element of bitterness in the country as the conduct of the forces under the Minister over whom he seems to have no control. If it were not for this spirit which he is allowing to be engendered, probably a great deal of the bitterness which now exists could be eliminated altogether. It is not merely that he is doing what is stupid, violent and unfair with regard to individuals, but he is actually impeding any sort of progress by which men living in the same nation could come to a common understanding as to the interests of the country.

Mr. Lemass

I was amused at the reply the Minister read out yesterday to the question tabled by Deputy Little. No doubt, the Minister was also amused on reading it. No doubt, also the official of his Department, to whom was entrusted the task of drafting it, was amused when writing it. But there are certain points arising out of it that I should like the Minister to deal with, now that he has an opportunity of elaborating it. The Minister states in his reply that his attitude has changed since the date upon which he made the original promise. His attitude has changed. The Minister will remember that I was a member of a deputation which went to him shortly after he was appointed to discuss certain brutal treatment which had been given to Mr. George Gilmore in Mountjoy Prison. It was out of these reports as to brutal treatment in the prison that this question of having somebody in whom we would have confidence appointed a member of the visiting committee arose, so that we could check the accuracy of the reports which reached us without the necessity of tabling questions in the Dáil. The Minister undertook to consider that proposal favourably. The Minister's attitude has changed. In case the Minister does not realise exactly why his attitude has changed, I should like to tell him. At that time, the Minister had just been appointed. He, no doubt, thought that he would, as Minister, control the working of his Department. He no doubt thought also, being a person associated with the administration of the law in the past, that his Department acted in a perfectly legal manner. The Minister, however, cannot have been long in office before he was thoroughly disillusioned. He realised, first of all, that he had absolutely no voice in the decisions of his Department or any control over its activities; and, secondly, that there were many things done by his Department which could not possibly be brought into the light of day.

All this story which was concocted by some official in his Department and which was read out yesterday, is designed to conceal the fact that the Minister is not in a position to carry out the undertaking he gave. The Minister will not be let. The officials of his Department have said "No," and he has to come here and say "No" on their behalf. That is all that has happened. Things are going on in Mountjoy that these officials do not want revealed. Therefore, the Minister very obediently comes forward in public and concocts a long story to explain why it is that an undertaking given by him cannot be honoured and why anybody in whom half the elected representatives of the people would have confidence cannot be appointed a member of a visiting committee. The Minister says that no prisoners in Mountjoy are in solitary confinement. That is merely a matter of opinion. Certain prisoners are getting no exercise because they have been offered exercise upon conditions which they consider unreasonable.

Minister for Justice (Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney)

Ordinary prison conditions.

Mr. Lemass

They will not take exercise on those conditions, so that in consequence they are in solitary confinement.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

They are not confined; they are stopping voluntarily in their cells.

Mr. Lemass

In consequence of which they are locked separately into their cells.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

No. They are asked to go out. The doors are opened, and they are asked to go out every morning and will not go.

Mr. Lemass

On certain conditions. They refuse to comply with the conditions and they are locked in again. They are alone. They are not in solitary confinement, but they are alone. There is a difference apparently.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

By their own choice.

Mr. Lemass

Possibly it can even be argued that they are in prison by their own choice. If they had not taken the action which resulted in their arrest they would never have gone to prison. Therefore, as it must be admitted that all men have a free will it may be said that they are imprisoned by their own choice.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

Not of their own choice.

Mr. Lemass

Does the Minister deny that theory about the free will of men?

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

I say that it was not of their own choice that they were detected in crime. They would have liked to have gone scot free.

Mr. Lemass

In any case, the point that arises concerning this question of free will as a matter of theory is that the Minister is not acting in accordance with his own free will in refusing that request. We do not ask that one of the particular three individuals mentioned by Deputy Little should be appointed on the committee. We do ask that there should be appointed on the visiting committee some individual in whose reports we could have confidence. somebody there who is not altogether under the influence of the officials of the Minister's Department. I would not pay the Minister the compliment of saying that they are under his influence. I do not believe that he could influence anybody. I do think, however, that there are officials in his Department who can so influence the members of these visiting committees that their reports are absolutely unreliable. The Minister is here by himself now; his officials are absent; his colleagues of the Cumann na nGaedheal are absent; there is no one here except himself; he is free now for one minute to do what he likes. Let him stand up and say that this undertaking which he gave will be honoured. He may get into hot water afterwards, but we shall stand by him, we shall come to his assistance. For these five minutes let him be a man and manfully honour his undertaking.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

I was rather amused when I heard Deputy Little talk about the seriousness of the matter involved, because the matter is so serious that I noticed he can collect a good friendly front bencher and three back benchers to support him.

Mr. Little

How many members of his Party has the Minister got behind him?

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

I do not consider this a serious debate.

Mr. Little

It is all a joke to you so long as you are paid your salary.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

I take it exactly in the same spirit as Deputy Lemass took it. I take this debate completely and entirely as a joke. That is the spirit in which Deputy Lemass treated it in the somewhat humorous speech he delivered, and I am endeavouring to keep up to the tone that Deputy Lemass introduced into the discussion. Deputy Lemass said that I am really a most virtuous person—a sort of an angel —but that there are devils behind me kicking and pulling me. That is rather the way in which Deputy Lemass treats this matter. If there is anything wrong in the attitude my Department has taken up it will please Deputy Lemass, or pain him, according to the way in which he regards me, to know it is entirely my own action; and he may be also pleased to know that I get all the reports from the prison governor and that I have the whole file here with reference to these prisoners. It may also please him to know with regard to the particular letter which I sent forward giving my reasons to Deputy Little that no one in my Department except the typist saw it before I sent it to him. Therefore it is not fair and it is not straight and not what any member of this House should do, to make, as he made, what I shall call cowardly attacks on the permanent officials. They should not be attacked. I am the person responsible.

Mr. Lemass

I did not attack any officials. I attacked the Minister because he does not control his officials.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

Is it not an attack on the officials to say that they are acting wrongly? There is not a single step that the officials in my Department take—I do not say in trivial matters—and not a single decision that is not my decision. Sometimes, I agree with the permanent officials of my Department sometimes I over-rule them, but I definitely state here now, that every decision is my decision, and that praise or blame is praise or blame that should be attached to me and to me only.

Let me get back to this particular matter. It is quite true I told Deputy Lemass and various other people at that time that I was willing to consider the appointment of a person put forward by them. Deputy Lemass may also remember that at that meeting I pointed out that certain statements were absolutely untrue and a member of the deputation stated that any sort of political propaganda was perfectly justifiable. Possibly, Deputies will remember that being said.

Mr. G. Boland

I was a member of that deputation and I say that it is absolutely untrue and the Minister knows it.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

Will Deputy Little say if it is untrue?

Mr. Little

Yes.

Mr. Lemass

He was not present. The deputation consisted of Deputies Boland, MacEntee and myself.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

I am talking of the deputation at which Deputy Little was present.

Mr. G. Boland

No, he was not present.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

The deputation I am talking of is the one at which he was present. I informed the deputation then that I would consider the name of any person they put forward. They put forward the name next year of a doctor. I pointed out clearly that as they had attacked the medical staff I would not appoint a doctor. I had an interview with Deputy Little and gave him, so that there would be no misunderstanding, a memorandum. I asked him to read that memorandum to-day and he refused.

Mr. Little

It is on record.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

Has the Deputy got that memorandum? If he has I think it is only fair that he should read it. I initialled the memorandum and handed it to him and yet he will not read it. I asked him to read it and he refused. The memorandum was to this effect that while I gave no definite pledge that I would appoint anybody, at the same time if the names of three respectable businessmen were put before me and one was suitable I undoubtedly would appoint one. That was my view on that occasion. As a matter of fact, the names of the three respectable businessmen sent to me contained the name of the doctor previously mentioned, the name of Deputy Little and one businessman. I did not, as a matter of fact, consider that that was in any way carrying out the undertaking and, therefore, as far as the actual wording of the pledge is concerned, as far as I am concerned, I kept it. But, I want to say this and to make it perfectly definite and clear that in certain circumstances I gave an undertaking. The circumstances since I gave that undertaking have altered.

Since I gave that undertaking and after I knew the altered circumstances, I will not do what I thought was the proper thing to do in different circumstances, when I told Deputies that I was willing to consider the appointment of a person who would satisfy them. I thought they were a Party that really meant to uphold this State, that they had sworn allegiance and that they were whole-hearted in upholding the State. That was what I then considered they were. I have discovered since that on every occasion they can they attack the State and the persons who uphold the State and if they hear any lie about the Gárda they give it as wide a circulation as they can. When a man is knocked down by a cow they immediately come along and say that it is the Gárda who knocked him down. That is the type of persons we are now dealing with. Only the other night a Fianna Fáil Party declared itself to be a physical force party. They declared they believed in physical force and were willing to upset the institutions of this State by physical force. That is the Party with whom I am now dealing. The Party I was dealing with masqueraded in 1927 as being a different party and even as late as 1928, although they were getting to be more doubtful then. In 1927 these Deputies were sailing under the flag of this State. Since that time they have pulled down the flag of the State and run up the skull and cross bones.

Mr. Lemass

The Red Flag.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

That is the attitude they have taken up. These men in Mountjoy are deliberately keeping themselves in confinement. They want a visitor now to go into Mountjoy and for what purpose? For the purpose of encouraging these prisoners to break prison discipline. Every speech they make here is a speech encouraging them to break prison discipline. These young men with bombs and revolvers are to be treated as young martyrs and there is to be an official representative of the Fianna Fáil Party going into the prison to say to them: "Keep on breaking the rules. Do not submit to prison discipline," and that is the one and only object for which the Fianna Fáil Party want to have a visitor to the prison. As I said already the Party has completely and entirely altered and changed from what, at any rate, it masqueraded to be. It may not have changed in spirit, but it has changed in outside form. It masqueraded as being one thing a few years ago and now it has thrown off the mask.

Mr. Little

And run up the skull and cross-bones.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

So seeing what the Party is, I now most distinctly state that I shall not appoint to the Visiting Committee of Mountjoy or to any other prison in this State any person who will be an emissary from the Party opposite to encourage people in prison to break prison discipline. Deputies opposite talk about the condition of these young men and say that their health may be impaired, and it is quite possible that the health of these young men will be impaired. If they confine themselves in their cells and refuse to take exercise it is quite likely their health will be impaired, and if their health is impaired it will be due, in the first place to themselves, and in the second place, to the Party opposite, who are deliberately encouraging them, and urging them, as has been urged by Deputies here, not to obey prison discipline and to remain in their cells in order that the Party opposite and certain wild people outside may get a little propaganda. In other words, Deputies opposite are urging these young men to injure their health in order that their Party may gain in propagands by it. They are willing, in order that they have themes for their rhetoric, to force these young men to injure themselves in their health.

Mr. Lemass

Your heart bleeds for them.

Mr. Fitzgerald

That is the attitude of the Party opposite.

Mr. Little

Are the skull and cross-bones the only evidence the Minister can produce for this statement?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister has not time to adduce any further evidence. The Dáil now stands adjourned until 3 p.m. on Wednesday.

The Dáil adjourned at 2.30 p.m.